Cultural Intelligence Versus Other Cultural Approaches Assighnment

ABHIMANYU TYAGIMScHwTM Group ‘F’

CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE VERSUS OTHER CULTURAL

Introduction

This essay has three main aims: to understand the idea of cultural intelligence, to

examine the cultural management theories and to analyze cultural approaches in

tourism industry and how relevant his cultural dimensions are to hospitality and

tourism managers in 2011. The term “culture intelligence”, there are several

definitions of culture intelligence. According to Kreitner, R and

Kinicki,A(2010),“Cultural intelligence(CQ) is the ability to accurately interpret

ambiguous cross-cultural situations, and is an important skill in today’s diverse

workplace”. Liver.D.(2010) claims that, “Cultural intelligence(CQ) is a meta-

framework rooted in rigorous, academic research ”.In other words, culture

intelligence is the ability which allows people to cope effectively and creatively with

diverse cultural aspects of environment. Moreover, culture intelligence enable us to

understand cultural difference through knowledge and mindfulness and give us the

skills to interact appropriately across cultures.

Cultural Intelligence is the ability to link and benefit from the cultural complexity of

1


people with different countries, work areas, family backgrounds, personalities and

organizational cultures. As a global manager recent days must have ability to cope

with people who are from different backgrounds. In other words, being flexible and

skilled enough to adapt the culture situation and learn how to deal with others from

the various cultures. Furthermore, there are three elements of culture intelligence;

each element is related with the others. First, the global manager must have

Knowledge of culture, it means knowing what culture is, what culture difference, and

how to affect behavior, it’s the first stage of develop culture intelligence. By

understanding our culture we can make some similarities and comparisons with other

cultures. Second, the global manager must practice mindfulness, in cross culture

interactions, mindfulness means simultaneously. it’s the mediating step that helps us

to understand knowledge to skills. It means being aware of cross culture situations

and using empathy. Third, the global manager must develop behavioral skills. It

means behavior chosen from an appropriate ways to encounter for national,

international and multinational business. The following paragraph will look at the

other culture approaches.

2


Analysis cross cultural complexities for national, international and

multinational business

Cross –cultural can be defined “as the global management, which studies the behavior

of people in organizations around the world and trains people to work in organizations

with employee and client populations from several cultures.(Burke,1983)”.

Analysis of problems and weakness of multinational business has shown that the first

important factor is culture. It takes more for a company to be successful overseas than

a quality product and high marketing standards. As we know, there is a human factor

that must be considered. Indeed, everyone is a culture product of his or her cultural

background. Culture influences our actions and effects the way that we look at things.

According to Ted,T (2007), founder of Prime Opus Partners and former president and

chief operating officer of Wyndham International, looking at things differently is the

first and most important step to take. Teng states, “If you can approach cross cultural

businesses that way it will help you to be much more open than if you just judge

things based on what you know from the past. By looking at things being different, it

will allow you to listen a lot better.”Moreover, Sherman et al. (1995)clams that

“culture is an integrated phenomenon and by recognizing and accommodating taboos,

3


rituals, attitudes toward time, social stratification, kinship systems and many other

components, modern managers will pave the way toward greater harmony and

achievement in the country in which an multinational business operates.”The growth

in cross-cultural encounters increases the opportunities for intercultural

understanding. Managers and researchers have increasingly the importance of culture

in organization environment. Therefore, we discuss about what are the cross culture

complexities encounters national, international and multinational businesses?

Hofstede (1980) points the measure of cultural values is one of the most widely used

among international management.

This study examined the validity and reliability of Hofstede’s cultural measure from

an ethnically diverse sample in a business context. Hofstede found that the national

culture could explain more of the difference. Hofstede (1980) found that, “managers

and employees vary on four primary dimensions: individualism/collectivism, power

distance, uncertainty avoidance and masculinity ” represent the measure of cross

cultural complexity in a business management context.

Description for each of Hofstede's Dimensions listed below

Power a Distance Index (PDI) extent to which power is distributes unequally

between people in the country's society. A High Power Distance ranking

4


indicates that inequalities of power and wealth have been allowed to grow within

the society. For instance, in High Power Distance countries, such as Japan,

employees are too afraid to express their doubts and disagreements with their

autocratic and paternalistic bosses. A Low Power Distance ranking indicates the

society de-emphasizes the differences between citizen's power and wealth. In

these societies equality and opportunity for everyone is full of pressure. For

instance, USA are a very centralized organization, subordinates expect to be told

what to do from their superiors because they consider each other as unequal.

Individualism/collectivism focuses on the degree individualism look after them

as individuals；collectivism is like a strong group or extended families. A High

Individualism ranking indicates that individuality and individual rights are

paramount within the society. Individuals in these societies may tend to for a

larger number of looser relationships. For instance, self-determination

characterizes such individualistic cultures as in USA, in business they try to gain

5


more interests for business not for building a good relationship. A Low

Individualism ranking societies of a more collectivist nature with close

relationship between individuals. These cultures reinforce extended families and

strong groups where everyone takes responsibility for fellow members of their

group. For instance, in Asia countries, such as China, harmony and respect

within a company is very important and should always be maintained and

confrontation should be avoided.

Masculinity/femininity focuses on the extent to which the materialism people are

more interested in things than concerning for relationships of people, others and

the quality of life. A High Masculinity ranking indicates the country experiences

a high degree of gender role differentiation. In these cultures, males dominate a

significant portion of the society and power structure, with females being

controlled by male domination. For instance, Japanese people expect woman stay

at home to take care of family without working outside. In workplaces

6


employees emphasize their work to a great extent. A Low Masculinity ranking

indicates the country has a low level of differentiation and discrimination

between genders. In these cultures, females are treated equally to males in all

aspects of the society. Feminine cultures consider quality of life and helping

others to be very important. Working is basically to earn money which is

necessary for living. In business as well as in private life they strive for

consensus and develop sympathy for people who are in trouble.

Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) focuses on the level of tolerance for

uncertainty and ambiguity within the society, such as: ambiguous situation.

A High Uncertainty Avoidance ranking indicates the country has a low tolerance

for uncertainty and ambiguity. This creates a society that establishes laws, rules,

regulations, and controls in order to reduce the amount of uncertainty. For

instance, Japan, Greece, it’s common for working as a life time employment .

A Low Uncertainty Avoidance ranking indicates the country has less concern

7


about ambiguity and uncertainty and has more tolerance for a variety of

opinions. For instance, USA, Hong Kong, they concern about the power distance

of business and uncertainty avoidance.

Thus, Hofstede’s(1980,1990) analysis covers multinational firms but he was not

interested in the relationship between culture and performance. Thus an analysis of

national firms in this important area will be interesting. It is also interesting how and

whether multinational firms can transmit their organizational culture to a different

nation with what consequences on their performances.

Critical analysis of Hofstede's cultural dimensions

National cultures can be described according to the analysis of Geert Hofstede. These

ideas were first based on a large research project into national culture differences

across subsidiaries of a multinational corporation (IBM) in 64 countries. Subsequent

studies by others covered students in 23 countries, elites in 19 countries, commercial

8


airline pilots in 23 countries, up-market consumers in 15 countries, and civil service

managers in 14 countries. Together these studies identified and validated four

independent dimensions of national culture differences, with a fifth dimension added

later. If you follow the links below you will find a map of the world for each cultural

dimension, which enables you to quickly see how similar or different countries or

regions are.

Initially, he uncovered four dimensions:

Power Distance Index (PDI),

Individualism (IDV),

Masculinity (MAS), and

Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI).

Recently, he added a fifth dimension, Long-Term Orientation (LTO).Moreover, a fifth

dimension explanation is followed by a chart created with raw data from Geert

Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions.

LTO refers to the degree to which the society upholds traditional values. High or

low dimensions predispose countries to resist or accept change. High LTO - In a

high LTO workplace, the society is entrenched in traditions of yore, which often

9


means that long term commitments and hard work as a plan for future rewards

outweigh the need for rapid change. Low LTO - In a low LTO workplace,

meaning the society has a Short-Term Orientation, represents "respect for

tradition, fulfilling social obligations a society change can occur faster since long

term traditions do not impede them.

The drawbacks of applying the Hofstede Model

The Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimensions can be of great use when it comes to

analyzing a country’s culture. However, it does have certain disadvantages.

Firstly, there are people of various cultures living in different countries. the averages

of a country do not make up to individuals of that particular country. Even though this

model of cultural dimensions has proven mostly corrected when applied to the general

10


population as a whole, one must be knew that not all individuals or even regions who

can fit into the general population.

Secondly, how accurate is the data? The data which this model makes use of is

collected using questionnaires. Questionnaires have their own limitations and hence

the data cannot be considered accurate. Not only that, but in some cultures the context

of the question asked is as important as its content. Especially in group-oriented

cultures, individuals might tend to answer questions as if they were addressed to the

group he/she belongs to. While on the other hand in the United States, which is an

individualistic culture, the answers will most likely be answered and perceived

through the eyes of that individual.

Lastly, is that how can one be sure that the data being used is up to date? How much

does the culture of a country change over time, either by internal or external

influences? Cultures sometimes do change due to certain influences. Due to this, it

cannot be certain that the data is up to date or not.

The contributions of the Hofstede Model

Hofstede is one of the most significant contributors to the body of the knowledge on

culture and workplace difference. At IBM, Hofstede's job involved research and

11


analysis on how culture affects the work place. He had access to a large database of

employees from over 70 countries. He started examining the 40 largest countries and

uncovered four dimensions that separate cultures. Later, the scope expanded to 50

countries and three regions. In 2001, he combined data from other researchers to

expand the reach to a full 74 countries.

Applying Hofstede’s Culture Measures in Tourism Research

Hofstede’s (1980, 2001) five cultural dimensions have been applied to the study of

tourist behaviors. The measure of culture is the focus of this study. Hofstede’s (1980,

2001) five cross-cultural dimensions have been broadly applied in the literature as key

variables in tourism research (Crotts and Pizam 2003; Funk and Bruun2007; Litvin,

Crotts, and Hefner 2004; Kozak, Crotts, andLaw 2007; Reisinger and Mavondo 2006;

Reisinger andTurner 2003). These studies are aimed at understanding how culture is

patterns in tourists’ preferences and behaviors, and their results provide guidance to

marketers faced with the dilemma of whether it is appropriate to standardize or tailor

the tourism product and its promotional mix (You et al. 2000). According to Girlando,

Anderson, and Zerillo (2004),“Sound inquiry demands we strive to comprehend, test,

and analyze Hofstede’s paradigm. Either blind acceptance or premature dismissal of

12


his work would serve no lasting purpose”.

From a research of tourists from eight countries who completed Hofstede’s original

instruments, the results indicates little differences between Hofstede’s 2001 national

cultural measures with the present study’s data. More details illustrates below table.

This finding provides strong support for Hofstede’s dimensions as a measure of

central tendencies of visitors from different nations. Second, graphically contrasting

respondents’ values along the five cultural dimensions reveals that the between-nation

differences are relatively small when compared to the within-nation variability,

indicating that subcultures do exist. This analysis also identifies international regions

that cluster closely together, demonstrating that national cultural differences do not

end at national borders.

Table 2. Evaluations of Eight Countries on Hofstede’s (2001) Five Value Dimensions

Country Power

distance

Uncertainty

Avoidance

Individualism

Collectivism

Masculinity

Femininity

Long-Term

Orientation

Australia 3.35 (3.33) 3.37 (3.23) 3.66 (3.68) 3.83 (3.68) 2.06 (2.07)

Greece 3.36 (3.35) 3.43 (3.29) 3.67 (3.72) 4.00 (3.81) 2.15 (2.15)

United Kingdom 3.40 (3.41) 3.20 (3.09) 3.86 (3.91) 3.90 (3.76) 2.20 (2.19)

United States 3.36 (3.36) 3.59 (3.39) 3.71 (3.72) 3.72 (3.59) 2.12 (2.12)

China 3.61 (3.57) 3.58 (3.40) 3.67 (3.64) 3.64 (3.51) 2.85 (2.80)

Indonesia 3.75 (3.70) 3.31 (3.28) 3.75 (3.69) 3.76 (3.69) 3.15 (3.05)

Malaysia 3.60 (3.67) 3.52 (3.40) 3.69 (3.65) 3.81 (3.70) 2.79 (2.79)

13


Singapore 3.59 (3.59) 3.45 (3.37) 3.65 (3.65) 3.85 (3.86) 2.50 (2.44)

Analyze concepts of cultural impact in management practices

With the globalization and international linkages have been a part of history for

today’s society, cross-culture communication is indispensable to open up new

environment, and allow us to look for new geographic locations and cultures. And

given that it can now be as easy to communicate with people remotely as it is to talk

face-to-face, cross-cultural communication is increasingly the new form in which we

live today. As a result, cultural differences are everywhere. What can be difficult,

however, understands how to communicate effectively with individuals who speak

another language. The cultures between the East and the West are totally different by

a rather large scale. It means not only the thinking ways differently, but how people

behave in daily life is also not the same. We will discuss the causes for cultural

differences and then some of the typical examples to describe the cultural difference

between east and west, and finally, ways to adapt to different cultures.

Leadership

14


Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an

objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and

coherent. This definition is similar to Northouse's (2007, p3) definition — Leadership

is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a

common goal.

Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership knowledge and skills. This

is called Process Leadership (Jago, 1982). However, we know that we have traits that

can influence our actions. This is called Trait Leadership (Jago, 1982), in that it was

once common to believe that leaders were born rather than made. These two

leadership types are shown in the chart below (Northouse, 2007, p5):

In a number of ways, Middle Eastern management styles differ from those in the

United States. Table below provides a comparison of six key characteristics that come

from research conducted by M. K. Badawy, which combines Middle Eastern, and

U.S. assumptions and approaches.

Management Dimension Middle Eastern Management Western Management

Leadership Highly authoritarian tone, rigid instructions.

Too many management directives.

Less emphasis on leader’s personality,

considerable weight on leader’s style

15

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/performance/skills.html

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/knowledge/knowledge.html


and performance.

Organizational structures Highly bureaucratic, over centralized, with

power and authority at the top. Vague

relationships. Ambiguous and unpredictable

organization environments.

Less bureaucratic, more delegation of

authority. Relatively decentralized

structure.

Decision making Ad hoc planning, decisions made at the

highest level of management.

Unwillingness to take high risk inherent in

decision making.

Sophisticated planning techniques,

modern tools of decision making,

elaborate management information

systems.

Performance evaluation and

control

Informal control mechanisms, routine

checks on performance. Lack of vigorous

performance evaluation systems.

Fairly advanced control systems

focusing on cost reduction and

organizational effectiveness.

Personnel policies Heavy reliance on personal contacts and

getting individuals from the “right social

origin” to fill major positions.

Sound personnel management

policies. Candidates’ qualifications

are usually the basis for selection

decisions.

Communication The tone depends on the communicants.

Social position, power, and family

Stress usually on equality and a

minimization of difference. People

16


influence are ever-present factors. Chain of

command must be followed rigidly. People

relate to each other tightly and specifically.

Friendships are intense and binding.

relate to each other loosely and

generally. Friendships not intense and

binding.

Motivation

Motivation is a psychological process through which unsatisfied wants or needs lead

to drives that are aimed at goals or incentives.(Lutans and Doh,2008) People differ in

wants or needs. The theories of motivation, in part, aim to explain the reason behind

these wants and needs. Most theories are based on the needs of the person and the

idea that satisfying this need is important before the person can focus on other needs

(Borgatti, 2001).There are a lot of theories, such as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs,

Theory X and Theory Y, Hertzberg’s Motivation and Hygiene Theory, and

Expectancy and Contingency Theories. In this part, we choose The Herzberg's

Motivators and Hygiene Factors to discuss, it will be indicated that the concept is

culturally specific, it offers a useful way to apply work motivational internationally.

Moreover, Herzberg’s findings revealed that certain characteristics of a job are

17


consistently related to job satisfaction, while different factors are associated with job

dissatisfaction. These are:

Factors for Satisfaction Factors for Dissatisfaction

Achievement Company Policies

Recognition Supervision

The work itself

Relationship with Supervisor

and Peers

Responsibility Work conditions

Advancement Salary

Growth Status

Security

The conclusion he drew is that job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are not

opposites.

The opposite of Satisfaction is No Satisfaction.

The opposite of Dissatisfaction is No Dissatisfaction.

18


The relationship between motivation and job satisfaction is not complex. The problem

is that many employers look at the hygiene factors as ways to motivate when in fact,

beyond the very short term, they do very little to motivate.

Perhaps managers like to use this approach because they think people are more

financially motivated or just take less effort to raise pay than it does to reevaluate

company policy for maximum satisfaction. When you're seeking to motivate people,

at first get rid of the things that are annoying them about the company and the

workplace. Make sure they're treated fairly, and with respect, no matter where are

they from.

Cross cultural Negotiator

Culture and negotiation style can take it is recognizable and understandable, or may

be just as because in the opposite direction from what we are accustomed to. The

evaluate difference to accepting a new style of business environment is to understand

that the world is a dynamic place, with each continent holding its own civilities and

business practices according to its culture complexities. For instance, Time

Orientations. Two different orientations to time exist across the world: monchronic

and polychronic. Negotiators from monochronic cultures tend to focuse on one thing

19


at a time. Such as, United States, Germany, Switzerland, and Scandinavia. Japanese

people also tend toward this end of the time continuum. Negotiators

from polychronic cultures tend to do many things at one time and the involvement of

many people. The time it takes to complete an interaction is flexible, and more

important than any schedule. This situation is most common in Mediterranean and

Latin cultures including France, Italy, Greece, and Mexico, some Eastern and African

cultures.

Conclusion

Culture is a social mechanism that shapes and guides people's thoughts values and

beliefs and ultimately controls their behavior. It is 'the collective programming of the

mind which distinguishes the members of one human group from another, the

interactive aggregate of common characteristics that influence a human group's

response to the environment. (Hofstede 1980). The numerous studies indicated in

various industries in the tourism industry (Cross Cultural Hospitality Management

1997) showed that when it comes to people's behaviour in organizations, culture

counts. Thus when trying to import managerial practices such as leadership styles,

negotiation patterns and motivation techniques from one country to another, problems

20


arise. As a global managers in business will always encounter cross cultures

difference for national, international and multinational business. Therefore, how to

interact effectively across cultures might be an important issue and a requirement in

today’s global environment. Once we learn how to work in them can be a lot of fun.

21


References

Kreitner,R,and Kinicki,A.(2010) Organisational Behaviour,9th Edition.Mc Graw Hall

International.p.100

Livermore,D.(2010)Leading with Cultural Intelligence-the mew secret to

success.1stEdition,Amacom,American Management Association.

David C,T,and Kerr,I (2005) Culture Intelligence: People Skills for Global Business

1stEdition,Berret-Koehler Publishers Inc

Burke, W (1983), Special issue on organizational culture. Organizational Dynamics,

autumn.

Cornell University's e-clips (2008) Cross Cultural Business Challenges

http://cornell-eclips.blogspot.com/2008/03/cross-cultural-business-challenges.html

05/03/2008

22




Sherman,A.,Bohlander,G.andSnell,S.(1995),Managing Human Resources.

Southwestern Publishing,Cincinnati,OH.

Luthans.F and Doh.J,(2008)International Management,Culture,Stratage,and

Behaviour.6th Edition.McGraw Hall.p.104-110

Itim international (2009) Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions http://www.geert-

hofstede.com/index.shtml

Crotts, J., and A. Pizam ( 2003). The Effect of National Culture on Consumers’

Evaluation of Travel Services .Tourism, Culture and Communications, 4 (1): 17-28.

Funk, D., and T. Bruun ( 2007). The Role of Socio-psychological and Culture-

Education Motives in Marketing to International Sports Tourists: A Cross-Cultural

Perspective . Tourism Management, 28 (3): 806-19.

Litvin, S., J. Crotts, and F. Hefner ( 2004). Cross Cultural Tourism Behavior: A

Replication and Extension Involving Hofstede’s Uncertainty Avoidance Dimension.

International Journal of Tourism Research, 6 (1): 29-37

23

http://www.geert-hofstede.com/index.shtml

http://www.geert-hofstede.com/index.shtml


Kozak, M., J. Crotts, and R. Law ( 2007). The Impact of the Perception of Risk on

International Travelers. International Journal of Tourism Research, 9 (4): 233-42.

Reisinger, Y., and F. Mavondo ( 2006). Cultural Consequences on Traveler Risk

Perceptions and Safety. Tourism Analysis, 11 (4): 265-84.

Reisinger, Y., and L. Turner ( 2003). Cross Cultural Behavior in Tourism: Concepts

and Analysis . Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann .

Yvette Reisinger and John C. Crotts (2009) Applying Hofstede's National Culture

Measures in Tourism Research: Illuminating Issues of Divergence and Convergence

June 2009. http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/49/2/153,p.154-164

Girlando, A., C. Anderson, and J. Zerillo ( 2004). An Examination of Hofstede’s

Paradigm of National Culture and Its Malleability: Italy and the U.S. Thirty Years

Later. Journal of Transnational Management, 10 (1): 23-35.

David C,T,and Kerr,I (2005) Culture Intelligence: People Skills for Global Business

1stEdition,Berret-Koehler Publishers Inc p.122-141

24

http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/49/2/153,p.154-164


Northouse, G. (2007). Leadership theory and practice.Third Edition Thousand Oak,

London, New Delhe, Sage Publications, Inc.

Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management

Science, 28(3), 315-336.

Gwendolyn C (2008).Theories of Motivation April 15, 2008

http://socyberty.com/psychology/theories-of-motivation/

NetMBA (2010) Frederick Herzberg. 2 Factor Hygiene and Motivation Theory

http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/herzberg/

Cross-Cultural Hospitality Management (1997) special issue of International Journal

of Hospitality Management 16(2).

25

http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/herzberg/



http://www.triond.com/users/Gwendolyn+Cuizon

http://www.amazon.com/Leadership-Dr-Peter-Guy-Northouse/dp/1412974887/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1270485118&sr=1-1/bigdogsbowlofbis

Cultural Intelligence Versus Other Cultural Approaches Assighnment

Documents