Course Title : Masters In Business Administration Year: 2011

Module Title: HRMM002 Developing Cross Cultural Capability

Student Name Al Gega Student Number:

Tutor: Holgar siemons Date assignment due 21/11/2011 Date submitted :21/11/2011

Executive Summary: 330 words Number of tables: 5

Main text: 3000 words Number of figures: 5

Student Declaration: This is to certify that the attached work is my own. All external references and sources are clearly acknowledged and identified within the contents. I am aware of the University regulations concerning plagiarism and collusion.

Student Signature…………………………………………. Date………………………….

Note: In the case of group work, all group members must sign the above declaration.

Tutor Comments:

Structure and Presentation

Use of appropriate literature

Use of appropriate data/industry examples

Mark……………………………Tutor Signature………………Date……………….

(This is a provisional mark until moderated by the external examiner)

Cross-Cultural Consulting Services .

Cross-cultural consulting report on improving cooperations of ABC LTD subsidaries in UK,China and India.

China UK India

Cross-Cultural Analysis Report

Acknowledgment I

Acknowledgment

First of all, I would love to thank everyone at The University of Northampton Business School. They have an extremely friendly and helpful team who have truly been a source of guidance and support throughout this development.

I specifically, would love to thank my lecturers Dr Adrian Pryce and Dr Holger Siemons who with great patience and professionalism have increased my culture intelligence at the highest levels, endured all my questions and helped me with all the problems.

Also an immense thank you to my MBA friends for their everlasting support that they have shown even at most difficult times

Finally, I would love to dedicate this development to The University of Northampton for giving me the opportunity to experience such knowledgeable and fabulous times.

Executive Summery II

Executive Summary

Internationalisation of business has led to growing importance in understanding different cultures. This is important as to avoid conflict and misunderstanding between multinational teams and increase efficiency and creativity. A cross-cultural analysis using Halls, Hofstede and Trompenaars, & Hampden-Turner, dimensions to study cultural traits of chosen teams.

This report found that, high context societies such as china and India are relationship based societies and agreements are made around trust rather than written contract. Conversely, the UK a low context culture is a rules based society. The Report advises, ABC LTD to implement a significant number of face to face meetings per year, develop a virtual communication network, and encourage team building tasks. The more contact these teams have with each other, the quicker they will learn to trust and build relationships with each other

The report determined that different cultures have different perception of time. India and China are both polychromic and synchronic cultures, thus time is circular, not absolute and cannot be controlled and people tend to change priorities depending on importance.

Chinese and Indians have a smaller sphere of personal space conversely; the British need a large personal space. The Solution is that ABC LTD invests, in informing about the personal space so it prevents confusion

China and India are ascription cultures with high PDIs and thus age, statues and education is highly valued and they tend to send the highest ranking people in the meetings. In the UK, there is not much difference between subordinates and managers. ABC LTD should be aware to send the right ranking team into the right meetings as to avoid offending the other teams.

This report recommends patience, when dealing with collectivistic, particularistic and affective societies that tend to avoid making decisions on their own, and normally the boss at the top is consulted so decision take time

Cross-cultural training has been identified as the leading technique for increasing cross cultural effectiveness. Pre-departure CCT aims to increase adjustment by developing an individual’s awareness of differences and similarities between cultures

Contents III

Contents

1.0 Introduction- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---1

2.0 Cultural Dimensions for UK, China and India-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --3

2.1 Hall’s Cultural Orientations -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3

2.1.1 High and low context cultures -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -3

2.1.2 Monochronic and Polychronic Culture: Perceptions of Time-- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -4

2.1.3 Proxemics-- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 4

2.2 Hofstede’s Dimensions -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- 5

2.2.1 Power Distance Index-- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- --5

2.2.2 Individualism v Collectivism-- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 5

2.2.3 Masculinity v Femininity (MAS) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 7

2.2.4 Uncertainty Avoidance Index-- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -7

2.2.5 Long-Term Orientation -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- --- 7

3.0 Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner-- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 8

3.1 Universalism v Particularism: Rules v Relationship -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8

3.2 Individualism v Communitarian: Group v Individual-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8

3.3 Neutral v Affective: Emotional Temperament-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 8

3.4 Specificity v Diffusion: How far do we get involved?” -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9

3.5 Achievement vs. Ascription: How status is accorded-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -9

3.6 Internal v External Direction: Relation to Nature-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -9

3.7 Sequential vs. Synchronic Time: Time Management -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 9

4.0 Cross-cultural Implications -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- -- ----- -- - 10

4.1 Multinational Team Challenges -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- -- ----- -- -10

5.0 Innovative pathways to counterbalance cross cultural complexities -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- - 11

5.1 Cross-Culture Awareness Manual for Multinational Teams -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- ---- - 11

6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- -- --- -- -- 12

7.0 Reference -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- -- --- -- ---- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --14

8.0 Appendix -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- -- --- -- ---- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---16

Introduction 1

1. Introduction

At present we are living in a time where globalisation1 is part of our daily life and it’s very common for projects to involve teams from different countries and the expectation of design and efficiency are gradually set globally. As the largest emerging economies in Asia, China and India are extremely important markets (Cohen, 2001). However, China and India culturally differ from British culture in many respects. (Hofstede, 2001;Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner,1997).

Thus, cross border cooperation cannot be without difficulty. There are many drivers that have contributed in shaping the British, Chinese and Indian culture over many years, i.e. religion, family, politics, education, weather etc. As Hoecklin (1994) puts it, people from different cultures have different views of the world and hold different assumptions about life and work so they behave differently. To improve cultural awareness for ABC LTD, team members have to meet face to face at least 6 times a year, following a carefully constructed agenda.

This would naturally lead to some initial challenges in cooperating with these different cultures such as expectations, norms, values, and language that can create misunderstanding and conflict during the cooperation process. To describe how these challenges may arise and the differences between the British, Chinese and Indian team approach, several organizational dimensions are included to provide an understanding of these issues.

Cross-cultural studies were done to try and understand why there are cultural differences and the factors that have led to these differences. Assumptions in exploration of culture came from the work of anthropologist’s kluckholn and strodtback (1961). They developed a comparative model with six cultural orientations: The nature of people, the relationship to nature, the relationship to other people, the modality of human activity, the temporal force of human activity and the concept of space (kluckholn and strodtback,1961;Browaeys and Price,2008). Their research inspired others in the field such as Edward T. Hall, Geert Hofstede, Trompenaars' and Hampden-Turner's.

Hall made the early discoveries of key cultural factors such as high and low context factors, time and space (Hall,1959;Hall,1966).Hofstede (1984) performed one of the biggest experiments in the 80s through the IBM survey study and analysed extensive date on the world value and culture in over 50 countries. This enabled him to build a comprehensive model which argues that people differ across cultures, on the extent to which they endorse 5 dimensions of value (See figure 1). Moreover, Hofstede treats culture as “the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another” (appendix 1 illustrates his findings) (Hofstede,1984; Hofstede,2001 Hofstede,2005, p5).

Introduction

1. Globalisation as “the process through which an increasingly free flow of ideas, people, goods, services and capital leading to the integration of economies and societies” (Köhler,2002).

Introduction 2

Trompenaars' and Hampden-Turner (1997) in their book "Riding the Waves of Culture" took the research even further by constructing the seven dimensional models (See table1) some of these dimensions are regarded similar to Hofstede and the others offer somewhat different perspective. The largestcross‐cultural databaseintheworld was collected, compilingkeybusinessissuesthatrelatetoculturaldifferences and explained distinctions between national cultures (see appendix 2,3,4,5 and 6).Their research focused on cultural dimensions of business executives and top management and thus restricted within a distinct class.

These dimensions opened the way for the immediate development of practical applications such as cross-cultural training programs and country comparison that could help people work more effectively in more than one culture. Furthermore, these dimensions can assist team members to understand their own cultural tendencies. Normally, team members are not mindful that they contain their culture with them and their unique maps of these dimensions. As soon as they begin to develop an understanding of these unique maps of dimensions, the team members might come to realise that others might have a different dimension map preference to them(see appendix7).

Cross-cultural Dimensions 3

2.0 Cultural Dimensions of UK, China and India

2.1 Hall’s Cultural Orientations

2.1.1 High and low context cultures

Hall’s study concentrated on the communication patterns used within cultures. This includes context; the amount information given for the communication to be successful.

China and India have a high context culture, “most of the information is either in the physical context or initialized in the person, while very little is in coded, explicit, transmitted part of the message”(Hall,1976).The communication style is indirect thus team members are expected to recognise the message of the communication (see table2).

The meeting is usually regarded as a “ceremony” to announce the pre-agreed decisions. This epiphenomenon is vital in a way of “keeping and giving face”. The significance is placed on setting, appropriateness, the status of the participants in a communication and the method of message delivery.

In contrast, the British are a low context culture and are direct communicators and the decision making process takes place within the meeting. They debate each other’s opinion and normally take an individualistic decision, thus silence is quickly filled out. They are the masters of controlling confrontation and coming up with solutions. This approach makes the low context cultures to be precise and provide only the necessary information. But, on occasion they ignore those differences from countries with high context cultures.

Cross-cultural Dimensions 4

2.1.2 Monochronic and Polychronic Culture: Perceptions of Time

India and China are polychronic cultures and individuals tend to change priorities depending on their importance (see table3). In contrast, the British like most Europeans have a monochromic time that tends to link with monochromic culture. Consequently, time is regarded as an asset that must be saved or well spent,(Adler,2002;Hall, 1959;Tropenaars and Hampden-Turner 1998;Hofstede,2001)Moreover, global organisations have strict deadlines and fast decision making attitudes. ABC LTD should avoid this behaviour since time in china and India is synchronic, not absolute and cannot be controlled.

2.1.3 Proxemics

Hall discussed space and our relationship within it which he named it proxemics. Proxemics research confirms that different cultures have different sensory worlds and that is perceived differently from two different people with two different sensory screens. Thus, different individuals using the same physical space might behaviour differently (Hall,1969)

Scollon and Scollon(1995) explain that Asians in general especially the Chinese and Indians have a smaller sphere of personal space compared to westerners (e.g.British). An Indian or Chinese speaking to a British might feel that they are keeping a distance, that’s because the British, feel discomfort with physical contact in public and communicate in a more subtle way. Thus, they might feel that a Chinese or an Indian is intruding into their personal space by communicating with close proximity.

Cross-cultural Dimensions 5

2.2 Hofstede’s Dimensions

2.2.1 Power Distance Index

The UK has a low Power Distance Index (PDI) of 35 compared to that of China (80) and India (77) that have higher PDI (see figure2). The low PDI cultures expect and accept power relations that are more consultative or democratic. Conversely, the Chinese and Indian societies and their less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power and wealth is distributed unequal.

The individual representing the authority (family included) is highly respected because they have decision making powers. Moreover, age is an important concept of PDI in both China and Indian where power and status is recognized by age, education and profession.

2.2.2 Individualism v Collectivism

UK is a very individualistic (IVD) society with high IDV (89) when compared to China (IVD 20) and India (IVD 48) with low IVDs (Hofstede,2001). This suggests that china is a very collectivistic society and to some lesser extent India as well. In the individualistic society the attention is on the individual achievements and performances. In the collectivistic societies like china and India the individuals act predominantly as a group (i.e.family and relatives). The group is normally used for protection in exchange for unquestioned loyalty by that individual.

Cross-cultural Dimensions 6

With current populations of 1.3 and 1.2 billion respectively China and Indian have many local dialects, thus group prosperity and cohesion is a safe goal. China IVD is lower than other Asian countries (see figure3) but the communist rule and teaching of Confucius are majorly responsible for this. In comparison, India has higher IVD than China, as Cohen (2001: 36) puts it “India is an ancient state but a modern civilisation” partly due to the British rule. Collectivistic societies are highly family orientated. Therefore, conversations might start with family questions. This can be considered civilised behaviour and a good way to establish dialog in the proceedings.

China India Hong Kong Japan0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Countries

Scor

es

Comparisons of some Asian countries IVD with China's

In addition, there are a range of people within the individualism and collectivism called ideocentric and allocentric (Triandis,1995). Ideocentric meaning people prefer to work alone and allocentric meaning people prefer to work in groups (illustrated in figure 4). The overall cultural variation in UK is individualistic with the majority being ideocentric(Triandis,1995; Hofstede,2001). In contrast, in china and India the overall cultural variations are collectivistic with a majority being allocentric (Triandis, 1995; Hofstede, 2001). This distinction is important as some people may not fit the overall cultural profile.

Cross-cultural Dimensions 7

2.2.3 Masculinity v Femininity (MAS)

Surprisingly, UK and China has the same MAS of 66 with India not that far off (MAS 56)(See figure2). Normally, in masculine cultures values are ambition, assertiveness, materialism and power as compared to feminine cultures where values is placed more on relationship and quality of life, often referred to as “quality of life verses quantity of life”. However, because masculinity is very similar for all three cultures the teams should not encounter a problem in this area and it does not need investigating.

2.2.4 Uncertainty Avoidance Index

Uncertainty avoidance index (UAI) is “a society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity” (Hofstede,2001). Usually, countries with low UAI such as China India and UK are to some extent comfortable with unpredictable people, events, risk taking and have a high tolerance to uncertainty. This promotes creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship. However, Indian and Chinese societies run on the basis of set assumptions (i.e.Social etiquette and norms instead of rules and regulations). This phenomenon creates big challenges for organisations setting up business in India and China. Countries that have high UAI are not comfortable with unpredictability and have developed formal systems and strict behaviour norms to control their environment.

2.2.5 Long-Term Orientation

Long-Term Orientation (LTO) index was constructed from a survey originally called "Chinese Value Survey" (CVS) to quantify certain Confucian values for specific countries(Hofstede,2001). This cultural environment focuses on long term outlook rather than short term gains. The factor of quick result versus perseverance to slow result is clearly shown by the Chinese’s term of interpersonal perseverance (guanxi). The guanxi is the exchange of very valued or expensive gift that contributes to linking and building highly developed relationships through mutual dependencies.

Long term relationships go much deeper than surface relationships, an essential characteristic in doing business in both India and China. Even though India does not share the philosophy of Chinese Confucian values many similarities are observed with Hinduism and the East Asian cultures

Cross-cultural Dimensions 8

3.0 Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner

3.1 Universalism v Particularism: Rules v Relationship

‘’A Universalist will say of the particularist,“they cannot be trusted because they will always help their friends”; a particularist, conversely, will say of universalists, “you cannot trust them; they

would not even help a friend” (Hampden-Turner, Charles and Trompenaars, Fons,2001)

Universalistic cultures believe that rules and obligations are a strong source of moral codes. Thus people from universalistic cultures such as the British (see appendix2) tend to follow the rules and look for the best way of dealing with all cases (Trompenaars and Woolliams, 2004: 51). They assume that these rules or standards are the right ones. Therefore, they attempt to change the attitudes of others to match theirs. These rules in universalistic cultures are the same for everyone (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, 1997). Thus, the UK is a rule based society.

In comparison, particular circumstances or events in particularistic society’s such as Chinese and Indian, are much more important than the rules.(see appendix2) (Gesteland and Gesteland 2010).Therefore, much more importance is given to the friendship and family bonds (e.g.guanxi) rather than abstract rules. Responses may change according to the people involved (Trompenaars and Woolliams,2004).Therefore, China and India are relationship based Societies.

3.2 Individualism v Communitarian: Group v Individual

Similar to the Hofstede (Individualistic v Collectivistic) dimension, it describes societies function as independent individuals or as part of a social group. In communitarian cultures such as India and China the culture places the community before the individual, in contrast to the UK culture where people make their own decisions to grant success or failure (See Appendix3).

3.3 Neutral v Affective: Emotional Temperament

In a neutral culture emotions are held in check and are not expressed openly, precisely or directly. The UK has a highly neutral culture, thus people don’t usually show their feelings and maintain their composure because certain emotions are considered improper to exhibit in certain situations. But the golden rule is not to let emotions influence your decision making ability. When teams from affection cultures are dealing with Neutral cultures they should be aware that lack of emotions does not mean disinterest or boredom.

In affective cultures emotions are naturally expressed and China is an example of a highly affective culture but people from natural cultures do not like to show their emotional tones. Affective teams might experience that ‘’Neutrals’’ are very focused on the objectives and less on the person.

Cross-cultural Dimensions 9

Conversely, when teams from neutral cultures are dealing in affective cultures, they should not be put off when the other side grows animated, and they should try to respond to the affections of the other group. Moreover, affective cultures tend to focus more on the person and not so much on the objective or position. Consequently, Chinese and Indians used more feeling and instinct in making a decision. Finally, cultural factors shape emotional behaviour more than temperamental factors (Tsai,2006)

3.4 Specificity v Diffusion: How far do we get involved?”

Specificity v Diffusion correlates with high or low context cultures (Trompenaars, and Hampden-Turner,2001)Specific cultures such as the UK encountering diffuse cultures like china and India (Hampden-Turner, and Trompenaars,2001)(see appendix4) could be complex and difficult. The British team would be immediately friendly to the Chinese and Indian teams, that’s because they do not expect those teams to be part of their lives outside work. Conversely, the Chinese and Indians are initially cautious to make friends because they know they could become close friends at work and outside work (Trompenaars, and Hampden-Turner, 1997). Building close relationships helps them to gain a much more detailed picture of their potential partner.

3.5 Achievement vs. Ascription: How status is accorded

In the achievement culture, such as the UK, social status is obtained from a person’s achievement. In Ascription cultures, such as China and India social status is obtained from personal attributes such as age, social connections, experience or gender (Overgaard ,2010).

3.6 Internal v External Direction: Relation to Nature

The belief, that members of the society control their environment (external) as oppose to their environment controlling them (Internal)(see appendix6).

3.7 Sequential v Synchronic Time: Time Management

China and India are synchronic oriented cultures and time is given to relationships and status (Gesteland, and Gesteland, 2010). Time tends to be monochromic and linear in the western world (UK) but in India and China is circular and polychromic(Trompenaars, and Hampden-Turner, 2001:125; Lewis, 2006). It also, correlates with Hofstede’s Long-time orientation.

Cross-culture Implications 10

4.0 Cross-cultural Implications

4.1 Multinational Team Challenges

One can contrast with possible implications that may arise with the collaboration of British, Chinese and Indian teams. Table 4, was assembled using all the available cultural dimensions, to illustration all the initial challenges.

Cross-culture Implications 11

One of the initial challenges will be the language barrier; English is an official language in Indian so the majority of Indians speak it. However, Indian English differs from British English with regards to the same word having different meaning.They might say,‘’I am like it very much’’Instead of, ‘’I like it very much’’. As Gibson and Gibbs, (2006) puts it, barriers to effective communications make it difficult for diverse teams to share the idea the way that teams can use them. Larger teams are associated with; increased conflict, decreased communication effectiveness, decreased coordination and decreased satisfaction (see appendix10)(Gratton and Erickson,2007; Stahl et al,2009).

Teams that are dispersed and not co-located are associated with low creativity and less effective communication. In addition, they run a risk of social loafing and decreased cohesion (Stahl et al,2009).During an initial encounter teams may experience culture shock, and go through a list of negative symptoms (Miller and El-Aidi,2008). This is a significant challenge and failure to overcome this can negatively affect team performance eventually leading to cooperative failure.

5.0 Innovative pathways to counterbalance cross cultural complexities

5.1 Cross-Culture Awareness Manual for Multinational Teams

Cultural Awareness manual constructed from all three; Halls, Hofstede’s and Trompenaar dimensions is a novel ideal and would be useful to ABC LTD by providing teams with prior knowledge and cultural intelligence needed to succeed in meetings, negotiations, relocation etc. (See table5). By looking at the manual; the Chinese and Indian teams will become culturally aware not to invade personal space when talking with a British Team. Conversely, a British team member will know that if his personal space is invaded it might be due to culture differences and not take it personally (See table5). This manual can be used by team members to build a dimension map for themself and their team mates that can counterbalance cross cultural complexities.

Conclusions and Recommendations 12

6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

Internationalisation of business in the last 70 years has led to growing importance in understanding different cultures. This is important as to avoid conflict and misunderstanding between multinational teams and increase efficiency and creativity. A cross-cultural analysis using Halls, Hofstede and Trompenaars, & Hampden-Turner, dimensions appear to define cultural traits of any chosen team.

The UK a low context culture is a rules based society. Whereas China and India are high context, relationship cultures and agreements are made around trust rather than written contract. This could lead to potential confusion and conflict between high and low context teams. The solution for ABC LTD is to arrange a significant number of face to face meetings per year, develop a virtual communication network, and encourage team building tasks. The more contact these teams have with each other, the quicker they will learn to trust and build relationships with each other.

In China and Indian meetings are seen as ‘’ceremony’’ to announce pre-agreed decisions this is vital in ‘’keeping and giving face’’. Therefore, informing the participant in the meeting about the decisions is not recommended. The solution is to send a detailed agenda in advance.

It is recommended that all teams must be aware, that different cultures have different perception of time. India and China are both polychromic and synchronic cultures, thus time is circular, not absolute and cannot be controlled and people tend to change priorities depending on importance. Team flexibility and appointment reminders are crucial to solving this issue.

Chinese and Indians have a smaller sphere of personal space conversely; the British need a large personal space. Implications may arise when members of Indian, Chinese or British teams try to communicate in to close proximity. It is recommended to avoid it and communicate from suitable distance.

China and India are ascription cultures with high PDIs and thus age, statues and education is highly valued and they tend to send the highest ranking persons in the meetings. In contrast, the UK has low PDI thus; there is a much smaller gap between the managers and subordinates. Hence, ABC LTD should be aware to send the right ranking team into the right meetings as to avoid offending the other teams.

The UK is a highly individualistic and universalistic society and team members might make a quick and individualistic decision following the rules. The Chinese and Indians who are collectivistic particularistic and affective culture societies that tend to avoid making decisions on their own but rather make decision as a group They are an affective culture, and would do anything to ‘’saving face’’ in case things go wrong, and lead to a confrontation with their boss

Conclusions and Recommendations 13

The long term orientation cultures such as china and Indian may be more influenced by long term benefits and relationship building rather than short term factors and quick profit.

Teams should have at least 6- face to face meetings every year as well as communicating virtually (Skype conferencing) on weekly bases. Virtual teams, provide increased benefits such as low cost, flexible responsiveness to meet the dynamic environment.

One way to provide team adjustment is to enhance cultural awareness of the other team’s cultural norms and behaviours through Cross Cultural Training (CCT). CCT has been identified as the leading technique for increasing cross cultural effectiveness.

Reference 14

Reference

1. Austin, J. R. (1997). A cognitive framework for understanding demographic influences in groups. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 5(4): 342–359.

2. Ballow, D G, (2004),Globalization and Cross-Cultural Issues in Project Management PMKT ’ Inc.., Texas 75070

3. Charles Hampden-Turner and Fons Trompenaars 2004 Managing People Across CulturesCapstone United States ISBN 1841124729

4. Chan, S. (1992), Families with Asian roots, In Lynch and Hanson (eds.).5. Cohen, S (2001) India Emerging Power. Washington D.C: Brookings Institution Pr6. Frank and Toland (2002), Email as a learning technology in the South Pacific: An

evaluation Educational Technology & Society 5 (3) 2002 7. Gesteland, Richard R. & Gesteland, Mary C (2010). India Cross Cultural Business

Behavior.8. Gratton, L., & Erickson, T. 2007. Eight ways to build collaborative teams. Harvard

Business Review, 85(11): 100–109.9. Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. 2006. Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of

geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(3):451–495.

10. Hall, E.T. (1959). The Silent Language, New York: Doubleday11. Hall, E.T. (1966). The Hidden Dimension, New York: Doubleday12. Hall, E.T. (1983). The Dance of Life, The Other Dimension of Time, New York: Doubleday13. Hofstede, Geert (1984). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-

Related Values (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills CA: SAGE Publications14. Hofstede, Geert (2001). Culture's Consequences: comparing values, behaviors,

institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

15. Hall, M., de Jong, M., & Steehouder, M. (2004). Cultural differences and usability evaluation: Individualistic and collectivistic participants compared. Technical Communication, 51(4), 489-503.

16. Jehn, K. A., and Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2): 238–251

17. Köhler, H. (2002) ‘Working for a better globalisation’, unpublished conferencepaper, IMF conference on Humanising the Global Economy.

18. Lewis. D R,( 2006) When cultures collide: Leading Across cultures, 3 rd ed,Finland , WS Bookwell

19. Miller, S,H. and El-Aidi N (2008). Culture Shock: Causes and Symptoms, Internation Business Research,Vol. 1, No. 1

20. Moustafa S K, (2001) A CROSS-CULTURAL INVESTIGATION OF POLYCHRONICITY: A STUDY OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THREE COUNTRIES Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne

Reference 15

21. Mendenhall, et al, (2004) ‘Evaluation Studies of Cross-Cultural Training Programs. A Review of the Literature from 1988 to 2000’. In: Landis, D., Bennett, J.M. and Bennett, M.J. (eds): Handbook of Intercultural Training, 3. ed., Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.

22. Hargraves,O (2001) Culture Shock: London at Your Door, Graphic Arts Center Publishing Company, P.O. Box 10306, Portland, OR 97296-0306 USA ISBN 1558686231.

23. Overgaard , L. (2010)An analysis of Indian Culture in an Era of Globalisation, Department of Language and Business Communication ,Aarhus School of Business ,Aarhus University

24. Hobday, P (2005) Customs & Etiquette of England, 3rd ed., Bravo Ltd ISBN 185733387X25. Romero, E.J. (2002) ‘The Effect of Expatriate Training on Expatriate Effectiveness’,

Journalof Management Research, 2: 73.26. Desai,R (1999) Indian Business Culture, Butterworth-Heinemann, Linacre House, Jordan

Hill, Oxford OX2 8DP, U.K. ISBN 9-810-09327-627. Scollon, R. and Scollon, S. (1995), Intercultural Communication, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.28. Stahl. G K, Maznevski M L, Voigt A, Jonsen K, (2009), Unraveling the effects of cultural

diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups Journal of International Business Studies, 1–20 & 2009 Academy of International Business All rights reserved 0047-2506

29. Sosik, John and Jung Dong, (2002) "Work-group characteristics and performance in collectivistic and individualistic cultures". The Journal of Social Psychology. Washington, pp 5-23.

30. Stoott. K and Walker A ,(1995) Teams, Teamwork&Teambuilding, the managers complete guide to teams in organisation,Simon & Schuster (Asia) Singapore pte LtD

31. Tan, T (2008) Culture Shock Great Britain, 2nd ed., Marshall Cavendish Corporation ISBN 0761454748

32. Triandis, H.C. (1995). Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.33. Tsai, J, (2006) Cultural and Temperamental Variation in Emotional Response Copyright

by the American Psychological Association 1528-3542/06/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/1528-3542.6.3.484

34. Weaver, K Mark, (2000) "Attitudes toward Cooperative Strategies: A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Entrepreneurs", Journal of International Business Studies, 31, Fourth Quarter 2000: pp 591-609.

Appendix 16

Appendix 1

Hofstede cultural criteria

(Source: Hofstede, 2001)

Appendix 17

Appendix 2

Universalism –Particularism

(Source: Hampden-Turner, Charles and Trompenaars, Fons: 2001: 37)

Appendix 18

Appendix: 3

Individualism – Communitarianism: Group vs. Individual

(Source: Hampden-Turner, Charles and Trompenaars, Fons (2001:51)

Appendix 19

Appendix: 4

Specificity –Diffuseness: The Range of Involvement

(Source: Hampden-Turner, Charles and Trompenaars, Fons: 2001: 93)

Appendix 20

Appendix: 5

Achieved – Ascribed Status: How Status is accorded

(Source: Hampden-Turner, Charles and Trompenaars, Fons: 106)

Appendix 21

Appendix: 6

Internal Direction – External Direction: Relation to Nature

(Hampden-Turner, Charles and Trompenaars, Fons: 2001:144)

Appendix 22

Appendix: 7

Show the Iceberg model of culture awareness

(Source: http://www.doe.state.in.us/lmmp)

Appendix 23

Appendix: 8

British national culture characteristic and management practise

(Source: Tayeb ,2005)

Appendix 24

Appendix 9

Indian national culture characteristic and management practice

(Source: Tayeb ,2005)

Appendix 25

Appendix: 9

Chinese national culture characteristics and manigment practice (Tayeb ,2005)

(Source: Tayeb ,2005)

Appendix 26

Appendix 10

The impact of team diversity on team outcomes; Result indicates (+) positive,(-)negative and n.s non-significant main effects

(Source: Stahl et al,2009)

An extended model of team development (Source: Stoott and Walker, 1995)