Essay National Culture in International Management

2774 Words Oct 16th, 2010 12 Pages
Introduction: National culture in International Management
Deresky (2011) defines international management as “the process of planning, organizing, leading, and controlling in a multinational or cross-cultural environment” (p. 458). Miroshnik (2002) suggests that although the economic and physical environments certainly are important issues in multinational business, the cultural environment has a special importance in multinational business. Therefore, it is essential for international managers to understand the notion of national culture, as it influences how managers and employees of a particular nation make decisions and interpret their roles. As a result, differences between national cultures not only can create important
…show more content…
Considering the importance of teamwork, collaboration, and cooperation in today’s workplace, international managers may have to expect less positive work attitudes from employees in individualistic cultures. Similar to collectivist cultures, employees in high uncertainty avoidance (UA) cultures are more likely to stay with the same employers for a long time, whereas employees in low uncertainty avoidance cultures perceive moving from one job to another as something quite normal (Merkin, 2006). These high levels of organizational commitment in collectivist and strong UA cultures arise from close ties with co-workers, managers, and owners, whereas individualist and low UA cultures tend to have a cost-benefit approach toward their occupation, employer, and the employer’s compensation system (Randall, 1993; Ramamoorthy et al., 2007).
Furthermore, the degree of centralization/decentralization associated with both high and low power distance cultures also affects employees’ level of organizational commitment, as revealed in Randall’s (1993) review on Hofstede’s cultural value dimensions and its relationship with organizational commitment. The findings from the article revealed that low power distance countries (i.e., Canada) reflected higher organizational commitment levels than high power distance countries (i.e., Japan and South Korea), due to the degree of centralization/decentralization associated with both high and low power distance cultures (Hofstede, 1980, as

Related Documents