World Journal of Management

Vol. 6. No. 2. September 2015 Issue. Pp. 154 – 171

Globalization, Cultural Diversity and Organizational Commitment: Theoretical Underpinnings

Van R. Wood* and Joshua S. Wilberger**

Greater numbers of companies and individuals now work in the international business arena. Companies operating abroad inevitably hire and retain individuals with varying cultural backgrounds. Understanding how to manage these differences presents opportunities for gain. A thorough literature search indicates that no research to-date has explored the concept of organizational commitment and culture in an international business context, and thus this article is offered as a beginning point for new and potentially valuable investigation.

Field of Research: International Business, Globalization, Organizational Commitment

1. Introduction

In this paper we - 1) explore ideas and concepts related to organizational commitment in the global commercial arena; 2) offer a model theorizing key drivers of organizational commitment in firms with global spanning activities and diverse employee; 3) provide examples using case scenarios featuring bosses and subordinates in international business from the perspectives of - a) high context versus low context cultures, b) Hofstede‟s (1980) four dimensions of national culture, c) Hall‟s (1959) silent languages of international business, and 4) conclude with a call for further research (using for example Rokeach‟s Value System) and managerial implications. In all, four exploratory research propositions are proposed and illuminated using case scenarios. The significance of this article lies with our proposed model‟s underlying premise that cultural knowledge is a key driver for any global manager attempting to garner or enhance the organizational commitment of his or her global team. A gap in the literature is apparent with respect to details and insights into what types of cultural knowledge and under what circumstances are the organizational commitment of a global team enhanced or deterred. This work aims at providing a beginning to filling this gap. We begin with an overview of globalization, followed by organizational commitment.

2. Globalization

In many respects, globalization is the force that has brought about a renewed interest in organizational commitment. When the Berlin Wall fell in 1989 and the Soviet Union imploded in 1991-1992, the old super story of our time – communism versus capitalism (central planning vs. market-based resource allocation) was replaced by the era of globalization where the barriers and walls that divided our world for seventy-five years disappeared (Friedman 2005). Globalization describes a process by which nations, businesses, and people are becoming more interconnected across the globe (Ali 2000). _______________________ *Professor of International Marketing and Philip Morris Endowed Chair in International Business, Virginia Commonwealth University, School of Business, Richmond, Virginia, USA **Master of Science in Business Candidate, B.S. in Marketing (Cum Laude) & B.A. Foreign Language (Cum Laude)

Wood & Wilberger

155

Globalization‟s impact has accelerated, driven by 1) falling transportation and logistics costs, 2) diminishing trade barriers, 3) increasing abilities due to advanced technologies to quickly and inexpensive communicate information, ideas, and innovations, 4) an expanding world of investors now able to participate in a broader global arena in search of promising opportunities, and 5) a mass movement of rural populations to urban areas searching for education and/or better employment opportunities created by the globalized world (Zakaria 2008). Globalization means millions, if not billions of formerly disenfranchised people can now compete in world markets and achieve a better life. To fully understand globalization two things are useful: a sense of the world today from a broad perspective and a sense of the monumental changes happening in the emerging markets of the world. Consider these realities. The percent of people living on one dollar a day or less has dropped from 40% in 1981 to 18% in 2004 and is predicted to be 12% by the end of 2015. Over the last 25 years, China has lifted 400 million out of poverty (and poverty is falling in countries housing 80% of the world population). During the same period, two to three billion people have newly entered the world of business and trade. Goldman Sachs (an investment bank) predicts that by 2040 five emerging-market countries – China, India, Brazil, Russia, and Mexico will have a larger economic output than the G-7 countries - the seven Western nations that now dominate global affairs including the U.S., Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan (Zakaria 2008). Globalization, over the last quarter century, has allowed for the creation of enormous wealth giving unprecedented opportunities for a better life to billions of people around the world. Globalization has become the “super-story” of our time. Organizations venture out into the far reaches of the planet to capture markets, secure supply alternatives, and aid those left at the “bottom of the pyramid” (Pralahad 2004). U.S. based organizations in particular began to expand overseas as never before (realizing that 96% of the people and approximately 65% of the world‟s productive resources lay outside the U.S. border – Zakaria 2011). And in doing so, many managers confronted for the first time the need to build supply chains and form strategic alliances including employees not of the same culture. This contrasted against what had been most common when only domestic markets were focused upon or when the predominate model called for expatriates to be utilized to a greater extent for overseas assignments. Indeed, as firms ventured for the first time into the international arena (or expanded their base of international operations), these new organizational members exhibited backgrounds with completely different traditions and customs. Employees came to organizations with different experiences and were often outside of their traditional comfort zones that define the behavior of bosses and subordinates. For U.S. based firms, these new members to the organization were more than likely from high context cultures (as opposed to the dominate low context culture of the U.S.). This entailed a high probability that they exhibited different morays, values, and motivations when interacting in a boss-subordinate relationship. In the context of the present article, the demands of managing and working with multicultural teams of employees brought forth a paramount realization, that being, what drives members of one culture to be “committed” to their organization may not drive members from another culture to do so. This reality (or more specifically, the lack of understanding of such) led to costly managerial blunders that could have been circumvented with the correct appreciation of what drives organizational commitment within different cultures and societies.

3. Literature Review

A historical review of the literature (Morrow 1983) reveals more than 30 different forms of work-related commitment. Recent works offer additional insights (Meyer, Herscovitch &

Wood & Wilberger

156

Topolnytsky 2002), with commitment being classified as normative, affective, and continuance. Social scientists study organization commitment because of its powerful association with known organizational outcomes, including employee satisfaction (Hunt, Chonko & Wood 1985), organizational performance (Morris & Sherman 1981), absenteeism (Hammer, Landau & Stern 1981) and organizational adaptability (Angle & Perry 1981). It has long been accepted in the literature that low levels of commitment are dysfunctional to both the organization and the individual (Randall 1987). Committed individuals tend to identify with the mission of their organization and are more driven to achieve its objectives and goals. Historically, organizational commitment has been characterized as a “psychological bond” to the organization that motivates individuals to act in manners that are aligned with the organization‟s interests (Mowday & McDade, 1979; Mowday, Boulin & Porter 1974). Research on human behavior has long held that organizational commitment is a good, if not a “must have” item in any organization‟s culture, if the organization is to truly survive and prosper (Jaramillo, Marshall & Mulki 2005). The key question becomes, “What drives organizational commitment?” Or more succinctly, “How can organizations instill and maintain a high level of commitment in their members?” A changing career landscape not-with-standing (Enache et al. 2013), antecedents of commitment must be identified before leaders aspire to influence commitment in an informed way (Hunt, Chonko & Wood 1989). Research focusing on the precursors to commitment has revealed a number of noteworthy antecedents including personal characteristics (age, income, and education), specific job characteristics (variety, autonomy, identity, and feedback), organizational ethics (Fritz, Harden & Conkel 1999; Carlson & Perrewe 1995; Cullen, Bart & Parboteeah 2003), and a well-grounded sense of corporate ethical values, when such values permeate an organization (Hunt, Chonko & Wood 1985; 1989). Likewise, concepts representing personal investments, anticipatory socialization variables, job search behaviors, and work relationships have been correlated with organizational commitment (Steers 1977). What has received only limited theoretical examination, and minimal empirical investigation, is the association between organizational commitment and the realities faced by organizations operating in today‟s globalized environment, particularly with respect to organizations employing workers who come from a myriad of cultural backgrounds and cultural influences (Cullinan et al., 2008). Studies have indeed investigated individual cultural aspects including collectivism and its influence on organizational success, but have concluded that a broader comprehensive model is needed in this area (Williamson, Burnett & Bartol 2009). Likewise, Tanova & Nadin (2010), focus on the role played by high context versus low context cultures in human resource development. They identify the need to develop models that can guide managers in how to deal with a broader array of cultural differences to achieve effective communications with their employees. The paper presented here is offered as a way to begin to fill these gaps in the literature and thus presents a more inclusive model linking cultural antecedents and organizational commitment.

4. Theoretical Drivers of Organizational Commitment in firms with Global Spanning Activities and Multi-Cultural Employees

Figure 1 represents a theoretical model that posits a number of relationships associated with antecedents to organizational commitment (outcome # 1) which in turn can result in a number of positive (or negative) realities for any organization (outcome # 2). While many of these correlations are fairly well established in the literature, this model as a whole represents new thinking and future research opportunities in this area. Specifically, the influence of moderators shown in this model represents the focus of this paper and a potential stream of new research which could lend valuable insight into the area of

Wood & Wilberger

157

international organizational commitment. As depicted, these proposed moderators represent a number of relationships that have not been fully explored in the literature nor fully researched by scholars interested in organizational commitment in the global business arena. Specifically, this paper focuses on these hypothesized moderators - namely – 1) high context versus low context cultures, 2) Hofstede‟s (1980) work on four dimensions of national culture and 3) Hall‟s (1959) work on the silent languages of international business. All three relationships are proposed as fruitful areas of research and learning. Again, given the realities of globalization (i.e., raising international markets and opportunities, where few existed before) and the importance of having loyal and committed teams representing multiple cultures in today‟s modern global enterprise, this model represents new thinking in term of “outcomes” that matter to most if not all international organizations (i.e., satisfaction, performance, turnover, absenteeism, profits, market share and ROI). There is a clear lack of knowledge in this important area of global business research.

Figure 1: Organizational Commitment:

The Conceptual Model of Influential Factors

5. High Context/Low Context Cultures and Organizational Commitment

The concept of a low context versus high context culture has been studied, reported, and discussed in the international business arena for decades (Hall 1959; Kittler, Rygl & Mackinnon 2011). While E.T. Hall was the pioneer in this area of research, many other researchers have followed his lead and used the concept of low versus high context cultures to investigate and explain success (and failure) in a variety of areas in the international business arena (Graham et al. 2008). As shown in Figure 2, Hall (1959) proposed that countries could be placed on a continuum from low context cultures to high context cultures (11 countries are arrayed in Figure 2 for illustrative purposes). The foremost underlying determinant of countries placement along this continuum is directness and style of

High versus

Low Context

Cultures

Hofstede‟s Four

Dimensions

E.T. Hall The Silent

Language

Organizational

Commitment

Satisfaction

Moderators

Personal

Characteristics

Anticipatory Socialization

Variables

Job Search

Behaviors

Job

Characteristics

Outcome1 Antecedents

Work

Relationships

Corporate

Ethical Values

Outcome2

Performance

Turnover

Abseentism

Profits

Market Share

Return-on-

Investment

(ROI)

Wood & Wilberger

158

interactive communication (along with the non-verbal aspects of communication within the culture that dominates in a given country). In brief, “communication in a high context culture depends heavily on the contextual (who say it, when it is said, how it is said), whereas the low context culture depends more on the explicit, verbally expressed communications” (Cateora, Gilly & Graham 2013, p. 138).

Figure 2: Context, Communication, and Cultures:

Edward Hall’s Scale

from Cateora, Gilly, Graham (2013)

Proposed Exploratory Research Proposition # 1 - Managers from low context cultures (e.g. German, North American) or managers from high context cultures (e.g. Arabian, Latin American) who do not understand or who misinterpret the importance of communication style and directness (indirectness) expected by their employees who originate from the other end of the high-low context spectrum, will see a significant decrease in the level of organizational commitment in their employees (and a subsequent decrease in the organization‟s performance resulting from such employees). Case Scenario # 1 – An North American boss meets for the first time face-to-face with a global team of subordinates from high context cultures in a casual restaurant (for purposes of brevity, the term North American in this paper is used in reference to individuals from the U.S. who have been raised in a predominantly low context environment). The team also has plans and a week-long agenda of meetings to follow dinner over the coming days discussing strategy, sales projections, and tactics. At this first dinner meeting, the North

Low Context

High Context

Swiss

German

Scandinavia

n

North American (US)

French

English (UK)

Italian

Spanish

Latin American

Arabia

n

Japanese

Wood & Wilberger

159

American boss launches into “business” conversations, demanding insights from each member concerning the issues on the agenda for the coming days (“What are your sales projections for Japan and the Middle East? Why are our sales falling short of projections in Mexico? What are the drivers of our great success in the Middle East?” – are typical inquiries that the North American makes of his team). To his consternation, the North American boss finds responses from his team members to be (in his mind) aloof, and superficial. Silence ensues and it is clear that this global team is anything but a team. The American feels the members are ill-informed at best and insubordinate at worst. The members feel their American boss is cold and calculating at best, and uncaring about building strong relationships at worst. What is going wrong here? Will the commitment levels of team members drop because of this interaction? How can the boss and his team get back on track and what should have been done to avoid this unfortunate situation to begin with?

6. Hofstede’s Four Dimensions of National Culture And Organizational Commitment

Hofstede (1980) and his collective works since the 1970‟s continue to be cited, explored, and investigated (see Mink and Hofstede 2011). His seminal research resulted in the notion that a given country‟s culture could be better understood by understanding four main cultural values. His early empirical work resulted in the scoring of 53 countries on the four values (dimensions) including – 1) power distance, 2) individualism (vs. collectivism), 3) masculinity (vs. femininity), and 4) uncertainty avoidance (Table 1).

Wood & Wilberger

160

Table 1: Hofstede’s Dimensions Scores on cultural dimensions for 50 countries

Rank numbers: 1 = lowest; 53 = highest

Country Power Distance

Rank Individualism

Rank Masculinity

Rank Uncertainty Avoidance

Argentina 18-19 31-2 33-4 39-44

Australia 13 52 38 17

Austria 1 36 52 29-30

Belgium 34 46 32 48-9

Brazil 40 27-8 27 32-3

Canada 15 49-50 30 12-13

Chile 29-30 16 8 39-44

Colombia 37 5 42-3 34

Costa Rica 10-12 8 5-6 39-44

Denmark 3 45 4 3

Ecuador 45-6 2 40-1 26

Finland 8 37 7 22-3

France 38-9 43-4 18-19 39-44

Germany, F.R.

10-12 39 44-5 6-7

Great Britain 10-12 51 44-5 6-7

Greece 26-7 24 35-6 53

Guatemala 51-2 1 11 51

Hong Kong 38-9 17 35-6 4-5

Indonesia 45-6 6-7 23-4 12-13

India 43-4 33 33-4 9

Iran 24-5 30 18-19 22-3

Ireland 5 42 46-7 6-7

Israel 2 35 25 35

Italy 20 47 49-50 31

Jamaica 17 29 46-7 2

Japan 21 31-2 53 47

Korea, Rep. of

26-7 11 13 37-8

Malaysia 53 18 28-9 8

Mexico 48-9 22 48 36

Netherlands 14 49-50 3 19

Norway 6-7 41 2 16

New Zealand 4 48 37 14-15

Pakistan 22 6-7 28-29 29-30

Panama 51-2 3 20 39-44

Peru 31-3 9 16-17 45

Philippines 50 23 42-3 10

Portugal 29-30 19-21 9 52

South Africa 18-19 38 40-91 14-15

Salvador 35-6 12 14 48-9

Singapore 41 13-15 26 1

Spain 23 34 16-17 39-44

Sweden 6-7 43-4 1 4-5

Wood & Wilberger

161

Switzerland 9 40 49-50 21

Taiwan 24-5 10 21-2 28

Thailand 31-3 13-15 10 24

Turkey 35-6 26 21-2 37-8

Uruguay 28 25 12 50

USA 16 53 39 11

Venezuela 48-9 4 51 32-3

Yugoslavia 42 19-21 5-6 46

Power distance represents the extent to which less powerful members of an organization accept and expect power to be distributed. In Hofstede‟s work, Indian organizations have relatively large power distance – the boss is expected to make decisions and the subordinate is expected to do what the boss says; while the Scandinavian countries have relatively small power distance – the boss and subordinates collectively arrive at a decision that all, to one degree or another, agree upon. Individualism (vs. collectivism) connotes the way individuals are integrated into groups. In individualistic organizations (or societies), individuals are more responsible for themselves and their own work and are rewarded accordingly. In collective organizations (or societies), the individual is responsible for the team or group as a whole, and gives his or her loyalty to that group. In Hofstede‟s work, U.S. organizations were ranked relatively high in individualism, while Latin American organizations – those from Ecuador, Guatemala, and Panama - were ranked relatively high in collectivism. Masculinity (vs. femininity) represents the degree to which individuals in an organization (or society) tend to place higher value on “assertive and competitive” behavior (masculinity) or “modest and nurturing” behavior (femininity). In Hofstede‟s work, U.S. organizations were ranked relatively high on masculinity while Scandinavian organizations (Demark, Sweden, Norway, and the Nordic country – Finland) were ranked relatively high on femininity. Uncertainty avoidance describes the extent to which an organization imbues in its employees a tendency to be (or not be) comfortable in situations that deviate from the norm. Uncertainty accepting organizations demonstrate more tolerance for behaviors or opinions different from their own. Rules and regulations are minimized. Tight-knit policies and procedures are avoided. They tend to embrace an environment of “free flowing” ideas and the creativity and innovation that may result. They are inclined to be more accepting of mistakes and failures. Organizations avoiding uncertainty tend to be more cautious, seeking security and safety more than perceived risky undertakings. Rules, regulations, and policies are established as a bulwark to guard against risky behavior. Uncertainty avoiding entities tend to be more emotional, while their opposites tend to be more objective and rational. In Hofstede‟s work, U.S. organizations tended to ranked relatively high in uncertainty acceptance, while Japanese and Hong Kong organizations tended to be ranked relatively high on uncertainty avoidance. Proposed Exploratory Research Proposition # 2 – Managers from organizations that tend to embrace one side of the value dimensionality as articulated by Hofstede, and who do not understand or who misinterpret the importance of these dimensions to employees who are inclined to value the other end of Hofstede‟s dimensions, will see a significant decrease in the level of organizational commitment in such employees.

Wood & Wilberger

162

Case Scenario #2 – A North American boss is meeting with a team of subordinates from India, Latin America, Japan, Hong Kong, and Scandinavia. He embraces and values high power distance, high individualism, high masculinity and low uncertainty avoidance. This “global team” is asked to tell the group what they have done individually to move the organization‟s goals forward and their future plans for the same. Each member is then told to critique other members‟ responses to this first question. The boss then offers his own observations of all that has been said, and makes a declarative statement on what he wants the team as a whole to do and what he wants each individual on his team to do in the future. However, he leaves the means to achieving his “declared” team and individual goals up to each individual, leaving a feeling of significant uncertainty and ambiguity among some (if not all) of the members of the team. He encourages them to be bold, “go out on a limb” and think outside of the company‟s standard policies and procedures. A general feeling of dread can be felt in this meeting among the team members. The harmony that existed in the team seems to be ebbing if not significantly damaged. What is going wrong here? Will the commitment levels of all the team members drop? Or will commitment drop for just some of the team members, and if so who will these team members most likely be, and why is this so? How can the North American boss, and this team get back on track and what should have been done to avoid this unfortunate situation to begin with?

7. The Five Silent Language of International Business

E.T. Hall first proposed the notion of five silent languages of international business in the late 1950s (Hall 1959). His numerous books that followed expounded upon these five ways that humans communicate silently and were labeled the silent languages of – 1) time, 2) space, 3) things (materials), 4) friendships, and 5) agreements. His work holds value to this day, especially for those dealing with the issue of organizational commitment in the global business arena. Hall noted that North Americans in particular (having been blessed with a huge and growing economy for decades) often considered international business opportunities as a “step child,” not worth the focus that the commanding domestic economy deserved. As a result, Americans were called many things including “innocents abroad” (à la Mark Twain), and as a consequence their ventures overseas often resulted in blunders, insults, annoyances, or sometimes at best, mere amusement of the locals. Hall suggested the five silent languages as a way to better understand the ethnic and social ways of those outside of one‟s own culture. His proposed five language model indeed provides a parsimonious framework to help the uninitiated be successful no matter why or where they travel or live abroad. The silent language of time (# 1) varies between high and low context cultures, and is influenced by organizational cultures. Time and its use communicates everywhere in the world. In low context cultures a delayed response to a phone call, e-mail, or text message could signal that your client or partner is too busy, too unorganized or simply that your communication is low in importance. Conversely, a quick response to a communication may signal it is low in importance in high context cultures. Time is said to be culturally based, thus asking for a rushed decision or response may signal importance or it may be an insult. The language of space (# 2) is much like time: it says little but speaks volumes. The location of office space, its size, and activity level within it signals much about its occupant. The corner of the upper floor of a high-rise building tells much about the position and power of a North American. It is the activity (or perhaps chaos) in a work place that conveys position and power in other cultures. Americans like a room with open space, furniture set along the walls. Japanese tend to have smaller rooms with sitting or gathering locations (furniture) being placed more centrally. Both convey cultural preferences and both could be

Wood & Wilberger

163

perceived by the other as either too crowded or impersonal. The distance that people stand from each other in conversation varies by culture. In low context cultures, shaking hands is the preferred method of greeting (a manly hug, with known time limits, is reserved for individuals who know each other beyond the mere acquaintance level), and conversational space is much larger for North Americans than for those coming from high context cultures (Arabs and Latin Americans are known to have conversations at a much closer distance than do Americans). In the North American low context culture, the movement of distance and space in business negotiations can tell one much about how a business deal is progressing. Here time and space may interact. A meeting starting out with a desk separating the parties, and then moving to progressively more intimate settings (e.g. lunch, golf) sends a silent but powerful signal that “things are going well.” In other cultures, one may seldom be invited to a business acquaintance‟s home (Japan, India), but it does not necessarily signal a lack of progress or trust. It could be a culturally based silent signal about how space is used. One needs to know when it is important and when it is not. Knowledge of the silent language of things (# 3 - materials, possessions) is also useful. How cultures use and display their material possessions offers insights into how a given society‟s values are viewed and arranged in a hierarchy. North Americans tend to have gadgets and machines for most if not all purposes. Machines wash our dishes and clothes, compact our garbage, and brush our teeth. Robots can be purchased that can bring us drinks and vacuum our floors, massage our backs. We have electric knives and even electric forks. Americans, because they are relatively “class-free” (movement up/down the socioeconomic ladder through accomplishment vs. family name and heritage) use things as a method to determine societal position. Their clothes, houses, cars, electronic products, where they travel (the services they purchase), all convey a message of their respective place in society‟s pecking order. Lee Iacocca, the legendary engineer behind Ford‟s Mustang, and John DeLorean, the brilliant engineer behind General Motor‟s GTO muscle car, are examples. Iacocca leveraged his success at Ford to become the President and CEO of Chrysler Corporation. DeLorean founded DeLorean Motor Works and the DMC-12 sports car featured in the 1985 film “Back to the Future” but later fell from grace in a high profile 1982 drug trafficking charge (Iacocca 2006; DeLorean 2013). In other countries, material possessions may send different signals. Dependability and durability of things that are purchased, used, and displayed may convey one‟s position (and level of respectability) more so than having lots of things. It is known that the Japanese value things that elicit an emotional or visceral mind set. Certain high context cultures (Arabian, Latin American) tend to value family, friends, business connections over material objects per se. In Arabic, there is no accurate translation of the word “privacy” as used in English. Privacy, a much valued condition in America, is translated as “loneliness” in the Arabic society where family and friends tend to be always present. To seek privacy is to seek loneliness, which is a sign of burgeoning mental problems or social detachment in some Arabian cultures (Rammuny 2000). In some societies, a big pay raise or big salary buys loyalty as it can be used to convey prestige and status or social position, but in other societies “money talk” is a different silent language and is used in different ways to convey different meanings. The silent language of friendships (# 4) should be understood by all international organizations and sojourning individuals abroad. North American society is generally known for developing friends quickly and also to move on quickly. Few North Americans have a large number of “friends” from their early school days. As expressed by Hall (1959) in other countries friendships are not formed as quickly. They tend to go much deeper and involve real obligations. It is often said that in the Middle East and Latin America “friends” do not let

Wood & Wilberger

164

you down. One of the authors of this paper experienced this living in Chile during the Augusto Pinochet regime. A friend literally stood in front of a soldier pointing an automatic rifle at the author and indicated that he would “take the hit” rather than let his North American friend do so! Friends in low context cultures are called upon in less intense times, to socialize, or to “get ahead” in life. In high context cultures, typically, one develops friendships not to collect favors or political/social capital. A friend‟s need is sensed and one has an inherent obligation to act upon it. The final silent language according to E.T. Hall‟s scheme (#5) is the language of agreements. Understanding this language is particularly important when negotiating agreements, as it is closely connected to the success of any alliance or partnership. Typically organizations operating in advanced commercial environments rely on a hierarchy of protocol. First there are specific laws, regulations, and policies followed by ethical or moral norms that form a set of generally accepted standards. Then comes informal customs, mores, and the like that those raised in a particular society know and accept as the right way to behave. In the North America written contracts are the norm for agreements. In other societies (again, high context cultures), insisting on a written contract before friendship and trust has been fully obtained may violate a potential partner‟s sense of protocol, if not honor. The realization of when an agreement has been made and when it has not is important. Proposed Exploratory Research Proposition # 3 – Managers from organizations that tend not to understand or who tend to misinterpret the importance of E.T. Hall‟s five silent languages, when interacting with and overseeing international employees will experience a significant decrease in the level of organizational commitment in such employees. Case Scenario #3: A North American boss finds his operation in a bit of crisis because a shipment of much needed supplies (for his business in the Middle East) is tied up in port. The necessary papers are not being filed with the right authorities. To rectify this situation, the North American flies to the Arabian – Middle Eastern country where his regional manager (and subordinate) is located. After a lengthy journey he arrives in the country, is met by a driver, taken to a very modern hotel where he gets a good night sleep and “western” style of food to eat. His driver takes him in next morning to the office to hold a meeting to clear up this situation with the delays at the port. The office is in the historic (traditional) part of town and to reach the office he must walk through a coffee house and hookah smoking shop only to enter an elevator that also has “strange” smells. He is led into a waiting room, where he sits with others who are also waiting. His sense of control of the situation fades. The waiting room and surrounding offices are crowded with lots of people speaking in Arabic who appear to be loud (but congenial). His wait seems too long given his perceived urgency of the situation but he is finally ushered into the office of his regional manager. To him it is a bit small, cramped, and again with lots of other people present, all apparently speaking at once. His sense of confusion and irritation is rising. He finally gets the undivided attention of his manager, who informs him the holdup at the local port is due to a local religious holiday that will end in a few days. To the North American this is unacceptable – “we need to make this happen and it needs to be done right away” he insists. His local manager indicates that he will do what he can, but some things cannot be rushed. The North American manager insists that their contract with the shipping lines and port authority specifically state that the needed goods are to be unloaded and delivered to the proper location on time (again, as specified in the contract). His local manager tries to explain to him that the contract cannot supersede a religious holiday. The situation is growing out of hand. Cultures are clashing around the notions of how business is to be conducted. What is wrong here? How can the American and his Middle Eastern

Wood & Wilberger

165

subordinate work this out? If this is not done, will the Middle Eastern manager‟s level of commitment to the organization drop?

8. Discussion and Conclusion: Managerial Implications And Future Research Directions

This paper has explored a number of concepts from the context of bosses and subordinates from different cultural backgrounds interacting in the global business arena with a focus on organizational commitment. Clearly, organizational commitment is a key driver to any enterprise‟s success. How to acquire such commitment and how it can be lost has been explored here from the standpoint of three established and respected perspectives in the global business literature – 1) high context versus low context cultures, 2) Hofstede‟s four dimensions of national culture and 3) Hall‟s silent languages of international business. By bringing together the literature‟s findings concerning organizational commitment and the international cultural perspectives presented here, in a succinct model, illuminated with specific scenarios, this paper offers new insights into global business success, and indeed offers the possibility of advancing knowledge in the area or organizational commitment in the international business arena, through future research into the constructs noted in Figure 1. Managerial implications from this exploration would appear to be both self-evident and profound. The best planned strategies, the best utilization of modern technology, the assembling of global teams made up of the “best and brightest” may not be enough to drive international business success if culturally sensitive relationships are not engrained in such teams and in the bosses of such teams. Bosses and subordinates act differently towards each other and have different expectations of each other when cultural borders are crossed. Understanding this fundamental reality, inherent in global business, is perhaps the key driver of organizational commitment and long-term success of organizations operating across international borders and cultures. Future research should continue to explore the three exploratory research propositions posed in this paper from an empirical perspective. Primary research involving personal interviews, unobtrusive observation, focus groups, and survey research could lend further insight into the issues posed here. Other established models of culture and values should also be considered for inclusion in investigation (ex. Rokeach‟s 1973 value survey– Table 2). More specifically, the focus of this paper on organizational commitment of employees and how understanding the variance of cultural values across the globe can aid managers in their thinking when attempting to build a loyal, “global” team of committed employees could be extended to the realm of customer loyalty to the organization though better understanding of how values affect customer propensity to buy and use one organization‟s product or service offering versus those of a rival. Rokeach‟s value scheme of focusing on instrumental and terminal values could prove to be most useful in such cases. A study conducted by Valencia (1989) and critiqued by Wood & Howell (1991) revealed that Hispanic consumer were significantly different from White (or Caucasian) consumers on specific instrumental values (immediate state of affairs) and terminal values (long term state of affairs - replicated in Tables 3 and 4). Like the above, based on these findings one could propose the following exploratory research proposition and case scenario.

Wood & Wilberger

166

Table 2: Rokeach’s Value Survey (RVS)

Instrumental

Values Country Rank

Ambitious

Broad-minded

Capable

Cheerful

Clean

Courageous

Forgiving

Helpful

Honest

Imaginative

Independent

Intellectual

Logical

Loving

Obedient

Polite

Responsible

Self-control

Terminal

Values Country Rank

Comfortable life

Exciting life

Sense of accomplishment

A world at peace

A world of beauty

Equality

Family security

Freedom

Happiness

Inner harmony

Mature love

National security

Pleasure

Salvation

Self-respect

Social recognition

True friendship

Wisdom

Wood & Wilberger

167

Table 3: Instrumental Values

Original Analysis* Alternative Analysis

Analysis Using Means

Analysis Using Ranks

Values Whitea Hispa p val

White Devb

Hisp Devb

Abs Diffc

Rank of Diffd

White Rank

Hisp. Ranks

Diff. in Ranks

Ambitious 3.97 4.22 .008 -.17 -.20 .03 13.14 17 17 0

Broad-

minded

4.17 4.32 .076 .03 -.09 .13 5.6 9 12 -3

Capable 4.30 4.40 NS .16 -.01 .18 3 5 10 -5

Cheerful 4.08 4.26 .042 -.06 -.16 .10 9 12 15 -3

Clean 4.00 4.49 .001 -.14 .08 .21 1 14 7 +7

Courageous 4.29 4.54 .001 .15 .13 .03 13.14 6 4 2

Forgiving 4.06 4.32 .002 -.08 -.09 .02 15.16 13 13 0

Helpful 3.96 4.44 .001 -.18 .03 .20 2 15 8 7

Honest 4.58 4.73 .005 .44 .32 .13 5.6 1 1 0

Imaginative 3.85 4.25 .001 -.29 -.17 .12 7 16 16 0

Independent 4.34 4.61 .001 .20 .20 .01 17.18 3 3 0

Intellectual 4.11 4.31 .015 -.03 -.11 .08 10 10 14 -4

Logical 4.10 4.38 .001 -.03 -.04 .01 17.18 11 11 0

Loving 4.30 4.41 NS .16 -.00 .17 4 4 9 -5

Obedient 3.66 4.05 .001 -.48 -.37 .11 8 18 18 0

Polite 4.20 4.50 .001 .06 .08 .02 15.16 7 6 1

Responsible 4.52 4.73 .001 .38 .32 .07 11 2 2 0

Self-control 4.19 4.51 .001 .05 .09 .04 12 8 5 3

*As reported by Valencia (1989) a Mean Values

b Deviation of mean values from overall mean

c Absolute differences [White deviation – Hispanic deviation]

d Rank order of absolute differences

Wood & Wilberger

168

Table 4: Terminal Values

Original Analysis* Alternative Analysis

Analysis Using Means

Analysis Using Ranks

Values Whitea Hispa p val White Devb

Hisp Devb

Abs Diffc

Rank of Diffd

White Rank

Hisp Rank

Diff. in Rank

Comfort. life

3.88 4.20 .012 -.30 -.25 .05 13 14 15 -1

Exciting Life

3.63 3.79 NS -.55 -.66 .11 6 18 18 0

Sense of Accomp.

4.15 4.33 NS -.03 -.12 .09 9 11 13 -2

A world at Peace

4.47 4.53 NS .29 .08 .21 3 4 9 -5

A world of beauty

4.03 4.37 .023 -.15 -.08 .07 11,12 13 12 1

Equality 4.03 4.54 .001 -.15 .09 .24 2 12 7 5

Family Security

4.52 4.81 .001 .34 .36 .02 16,17 3 1 2

Freedom 4.54 4.79 .004 .36 .34 .02 16,17 1 2 -1

Happiness 4.45 4.69 .025 .27 .24 .03 14,15 5 5 0

Inner Harmony

4.41 4.78 .001 .23 .33 .10 7,8 6 3 3

Mature Love

4.32 4.46 NS .14 .01 .13 4,5 9 11 -2

National Security

4.28 4.53 .015 .10 .08 .02 16,17 10 8 2

Pleasure 3.85 4.19 .028 -.33 -.26 .07 11,12 15 16 -1

Salvation 3.71 4.25 .001 -.47 -.20 .27 1 16 14 2

Self-respect

4.53 4.72 NS .35 .27 .08 10 2 4 -2

Polite 4.20 4.50 .001 .06 .08 .02 15.16 7 6 1

Self-control 4.52 4.73 .001 .38 .32 .07 11 2 2 0

Overall Mean

4.19 4.51 .001 .05 .09 .04 12 8 5 3

*As reported by Valencia (1989) aMean Values

bDeviation of mean values from overall mean

cAbsolute differences [White deviation – Hispanic deviation]

dRank order of absolute differences

Proposed Exploratory Research Proposition # 4 – Rokeach’s Value System and Consumer Commitment –

Wood & Wilberger

169

Managers from organizations that understand the instrumental and terminal values that differentiate various cultural segments will see a significant positive response to marketing efforts than those who do not have such understanding. Case Scenario #4: An organization markets its offerings to a community of an equal mix of Hispanic and White consumers. The marketing mix includes English language TV commercials in addition to Spanish language versions with Hispanic actors. These commercials depict a family using cell phones, tablets, and other types of technology that keeps them connected to others (like friends), but hardly to each other (family members). Everyone is using social media, browsing the web, watching videos, etc. Clearly the family is disengaged from each other but engaged with everyone else. What‟s wrong here? What could Rokeach‟s Value Survey tell us about this ethnic group? Will Hispanic families respond to this message with their wallets, or with a lack of patronage? Research focusing on such cases would hold value to global managers because global marketing is not a “one size fits all” approach. Differing values, culture, language, history, and other defining characteristics of a country must be understood to achieve success. Even a cursory review of international marketing will reveal several cases of costly mistakes in product roll outs and poor message translation. One infamous example is the translation of “”Coca-Cola” into Mandarin – originally rendered in characters meaning “Bite the wax tadpole” or “female horse fastened with fax” (Hobbs and Salyers 2008). Spanish, a widely spoken language, across many countries, over two continents, is sensitive to regional differences. One author of this paper, remembers his college professor explaining the difference in meaning of the verb “Coger”: “In Spain, it means to a catch, as in to catch a bus. In certain parts of Latin America, it has more amorous overtones. Using this verb in the same context, could result in people asking, “You did what to the bus!?” Clearly, like most new models proposed to guide future research, the model depicted in this paper and its underlying premise (specifically, cultural knowledge is a key driver for any global manager attempting to garner or enhance the organizational commitment of his or her global team), has its limitations. Organizational commitment is a product of many other variables not positioned in this model, including a company's mission, strategy, tactics, opportunities for creative input into the design and development of products and services, and the like. These and other variables, not included in the model presented, should also be considered by future researchers. It has been said that positive human associations are the linchpin of good business. People around the world, who possess a clear understanding of the human enterprise, and who clearly understand human nature, and the associated problems, expectations, and dreams that accompany such, will succeed. Those who do not, will more than likely fail. This understanding along with an understanding of management fundamentals can result in an unbeatable combination leading to success. Meaningful human relationships are worthless unless they contain sincerity, fairness, and impartiality. These characteristic do not come exclusively from formal education, books, research, or experience. It must also come from the heart. He or she who fails to fully grasp the importance and influence of culture on the success or failure of human endeavors in the global business environment is doomed to disappointment at best and failure at worst.

Wood & Wilberger

170

References

Abbas, A 2000, Globalization of business: practice and theory, International Business Press, Binghamton, N.Y.

Angle, HL, & Perry, JL 1981, „An empirical assessment of organizational commitment and organizational effectiveness‟, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 20, March, pp. 1-14.

Carlson, DS & Perrewe PL 1995, „Institutionalization of organizational ethics through transformational leadership‟, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 829-838.

Cateora, PR, Gilly, MC & Graham, JL 2013, International Marketing. McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York, NY.

Cullen, JB, Bart, V & Parboteeah, KP 2003, „The Effects of Ethical Climates on organizational commitment: A two-study analysis‟, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 127-141.

Cullinan, C, Bline, D, Farrar, DR, & Lowe, D 2008, „Organization harm vs. organization-gain ethical issues: An exploratory examination of the effects of organizational commitment‟, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 225-235.

Enache, M, Sallán, JM, Simo, P, & Fernandez, V 2013, „Organizational commitment within a contemporary career context‟, International Journal of Manpower, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 880-898.

Friedman, TL 2005, The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. Farrar, Straus and Girous, New York, N.Y.

Fritz, Janie M. Harden, Ronald C. Arnett, and Michele Conkel 1999, „Organizational Ethical Standards and Organizational Commitment‟, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 289-299.

Graham, J, Hodgson, J, & Sano, Y 2008, Doing business in the new Japan, succeeding in America's richest foreign market, Rowman & Littlefield, Latham, MD.

Hall, ET 1959, The silent languages, Anchor, New York, N.Y. Hammer, T, Landau, J & Stern, R 1981, „Absenteeism when workers have a voice: The

case of employee ownership‟, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 561-573.

Hofstede, G 1980, Culture's consequences: International differences in work related values, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.

Hobbs, M & Salyers, D 2008, November 19. China Advisory: Avoiding the Wax Tadpole Effective Chinese Language Trademark Strategy. Retrieved from <http://www.troutmansanders.com/11-19-2008>.

Hunt, SD, Chonko, LB & Wood, VR 1985, „Organizational commitment and marketing‟, Journal of Marketing, vol. 49, Winter, pp. 112-126.

Hunt, SD, Chonko, LB & Wood, VR 1989, „Corporate ethical values and organizational commitment in marketing‟, Journal of Marketing, vol. 53, July, pp. 79-90.

Jaramillo, F, Marshall, GW & Mulki, JP 2005, „A meta analysis of the relationship between organizational commitment and salesperson job performance: 25 years of research‟, Journal of Business Research, vol. 25, pp. 705-714.

Kittler, MG, Rygl, D & Mackinnon, A 2011, „Beyond culture or beyond control? Reviewing the use of Hall‟s high/low context concept‟, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, vol. 24, pp. 63-82.

Meyer, JP, Stanley, DJ, Herscovitch, L, & Topolnytsky, L 2002, „Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta analysis of antecedents, correlates and consequences‟, Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 61, pp. 20-52.

Minkov, M & Hofstede, G 2011, „The evolution of Hofstede's doctrine‟, Cross Cultural Management, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 10-20.

Wood & Wilberger

171

Morris, J & Sherman, JD 1981, „Generalizability of organizational commitment models‟, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 512-526.

Morrow, PC 1983, „Concept redundancy in organizational research: The case of work commitment‟, Academy of Management Review, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 486-500.

Mowday, RT & McDade, TW 1979 „Linking behavior and attitudinal commitment: A longitudinal analysis of job choice and job attitudes‟, Academy of Management Proceedings, pp. 84-88.

Mowday, RT, Boulin, PV & Porter, LW 1974, „Organizational commitment, job satisfaction and turnover among psychiatric technicians‟, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 603-609.

N.d. John DeLorean, viewed 2013, October 22, <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_DeLorean>.

N.d. Lee Iaccoca, viewed 2013, October 22, <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Iacocca>. Prahalad, CK 2004, The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through

profits, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J. Rammuny, RM 2000, Business Arabic, intermediate level: language, culture and

communication, Michigan Press. Randall, DM 1987, „Commitment and the organization: The organization man revisited‟,

Academy of Management Review, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 460-471. Rokceach, M 1973, The nature of human values, The Free Press, N.Y. Tanova, C, & Nadiri, H 2010. The role of cultural context in direct communication, Baltic

Journal of Management, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 185-196. Steers, RM 1977, „Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment‟, Administrative

Science Quarterly, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 46-56. Valencia, H 1989, „Hispanic values and subcultural research‟, Academy of Marketing

Science, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 23-28. Williamson, IO, Burnett, MF, & Bartol, KM 2009, „The interactive effect of collectivism and

organizational rewards on affective organizational commitment‟, Cross Cultural Management, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 28-43.

Wood, VR, & Howell, R 1991, „A note on Hispanic values and subcultural research: An alternative view‟, Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 61-67.