International Organizational Behaviour International Joint

International Organizational Behaviour International joint ventures rise important problems for human resource management and evidence for this fact has been put forth by the recent international management literature (Geringer & Frayne, 1990; Gantinsky & Watske, 1990; Zeira & Shenkar, 1990;Bleeke & Ernst, 1991; Yuen & Kee, 1993; Luthans, Marsnik & Luthans, 1997; Makino & Beamish, 1998; Lin & Germain, 1998).

Researchers also reached an agreement towards the fact that management approaches are culture-specific and when such approaches are being transferred to other cultures disappointing results could ensure (Lorange, 1986; Luthans et al., 1997; Pucik & Katz, 1986; Gomez-Mejia & Palich, 1997, cited by Rao & Teegen). Starting from such assumptions and evidence cultural typologies have been suggested by Hofstede and Trompenaars. Hofstede (1994; 1984) identified four culture dimensions considered important in researching work-related values: power-distance, uncertainty-avoidance, collectivism-individualism, masculinity-feminity.

Power-Distance refers to the extent to which cultures accept power in institutions and organizations; therefore, employees from high Power-Distance cultural backgrounds prefer to maintain a professional distance from their superiors. This could imply less employee participation in any decision-making process (Hofstede, 1994; 1984). Uncertainty-Avoidance indicates the degree of uncertainty a certain culture tolerates, the degree to which the culture feels an uncertain or ambiguous situation as threatening. The levels of anxiety depend on this tolerance: high anxiety levels correlate with low ambibuity tolerance.

Collectivism related to a certain culture refers to the prominence of a strong sense for group formations and social harmony. Such cultures favor team-based work and group harmony to individual competition, highlighted and valued in individualist cultures. Masculinity dimension highlight a culture which has a preference for display of power associated with prestige, status, and wealth. Feminine values in a culture refer to an emphasis on interpersonal relationships and sympathy. Trompenaars (1994) suggested a framework of understanding culture that consisted of: relationships between people (that subsumes Universalism vs. Particularism, Individualism vs.

Collectivism, Neutral vs. Emotional, Specific vs. Diffuse, Achievement vs. Ascription), and the attitudes towards time and environment. According to Trompenaars' model, a culture may be characterized in terms of how obedient it is to rules vs. The accent it places on relationships, whether it values the group or the individual, if the culture favors the expression of meaning and to what degree (neutral vs. emotional), and the extent to which it values achievement and how status is accorded.

Also, the temporal frame may be interpreted differently - synchronic or sequential - and the attitudes towards nature/environment may differ from culture to culture (including the way how control is perceived - the culture may favor an internal or external locus of control). The frameworks suggested by Hofstede and Trompenaars will be considered in the case analysis of the joint venture project between U.S. And Korea.

The consulting project described in the case presented "Ellen Moore (A): Living and Working in Korea," has met difficulties due to the clash of cultural values inside Joint Venture Inc. (JVI) formed between the Korean Conglomerate Inc. (KCI), and a North American technology company - Western Systems Inc. (WSI) with offices world wide that also included the Systems Consulting Group (SCG). The joint venture had as top managers two Regional Directors - Mr. Cho, a Korean from KCI, and Robert Brown, an American from WSI.

After presenting the general background of the business, the Korean culture and the professional background of the consultants involved, the focus is on the conflict issued in Ellen Moore's team. As discussed in the case presentation the team working on Ellen's project was led by Mr. Park and consisted of approximately 40 Korean consultants further divided into teams working on different areas of the project. The Systems Implementation (SI) team consisted of five Korean consultants, one translator, and three North American SCG consultants: Andrew Kilpatrick, Ellen Moore, and Scott Adams.

The problems in this case arise from the clash between the values of two different cultures: the American culture and Korean culture. According to Hofstede the United States is an Individualistic nation, high in Masculinity, and low in Power-distance and Uncertainty-Avoidance. Employees from such cultural dimensions tend to value individual recognition and praise. Anxiety levels are low in ambiguous situations. The hierarchical distance is diminished as cooperation with the superiors is seek and encouraged.

Korean culture, on the other hand is a highly cooperative nation, low masculinity, strong uncertainty avoidance and high in Power-distance. In the case study presented, all this differences are obvious. In terms of the difference individualism - collectivism, the collectivist nature of the Korean culture is better highlighted in the study. A collectivist culture emphasizes group formation and social harmony. The Korean employees in the situation described tend to place a great importance on team work.

Added to this are the team-building activities which take place on a regular basis (for example the drinking activities). Moreover, individuals take responsibility for the other group members, for instance the person who stayed at work in order to replace his colleagues. Loyalty is involved in these relationships and illustrated in this case by the same team member who remained at work until his boss were away.

With respect to the distinction masculinity - feminity the Korean culture is low on masculinity, and this fact transpires in the study by the focus on cooperation rather than on competition. This is obvious and is another argument for the collectivist nature of Korean culture in the behavior of apologizing for failure and low accomplishment, which was described in the case study as well. Human relations are important and valued rather than material aspects and power.

Hofstede suggested that having partners from both "feminine" and "masculine" cultures may even benefit the IJV because the aggressive attitude of one partner may compensate for the relationist orientation of the other. In this case the confrontation of Ellen and Andrew as representatives of a masculine culture and that of Mr. Song and Mr. Park, and between Ellen and Jack is obvious. Power distance relates to people's acceptance that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally.

The high power distance in this case is due to the clear-cut hierarchical structure that places everyone in a certain position. Uncertainty avoidance refers to the degree to which the members of a society feel comfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity, their tolerance manifested towards ambiguity. This dimension is high for Koreans and is illustrated by their emphasis on precision, the need for appointing and to know the place of every employee in the system.

Of all four dimensions mentioned which give rise to problems in this case, research highlighted that uncertainty avoidance had greater negative impact on IJV functioning and survival than masculinity, while the two other dimensions (individualism and power distance) had no impact. (Barkema and Vermeulen, 1997). Differences in uncertainty avoidance are especially difficult to cope with as they imply differences in how people perceive opportunities and threats in their environment and how they act upon them. (Schneider, S.C. & A. De Meyer, 1991).

High uncertainty avoidance countries lead to an organizational system of high formalization and hierarchy. In the countries with low uncertainty avoidance people are more attracted to flexible structures and give more credit to improvisation and negotiation. Differences in uncertainty avoidance in the presented case lead to differences in how partners perceive and respond to events in the environment of the IJV, which also caused disagreement and disputes between the partners, and impacted negatively on the IJV's performance.

In the presented case, specifically, the differences in terms of uncertainty avoidance are embodied in the inflexible hierarchical Korean structure and in their consulting strategies: for instance the communication with the client which is impaired by their emphasis on formalities - they did not see their clients unannounced and Korean consultants refused to interview the customers, because they did not want to disturb them.

This facts lead to a changed perception on the role of the consultant itself among the two cultures, as the American consultants were familiar with a transparent communication with their client, involving informing the client permanently with respect to the best means of achieving their goals. Confucian dynamism is another dimension defined by Hofstede, and is related to collectivism. It refers to the principle of morality, including perseverance, respect for elders and superiors, obeying to the opinion of the group etc. In the case presented, all these elements are present.

Morality is reflected in the way they handle consultancy - they decided not to disturb their clients and act in the behalf of their well-being, and another example is the high level of group conformity: the decision to obey and follow their Korean leader as a team in Ellen's detriment. In terms of analyzing the case from Trompenaars' perspective, what needs to be considered is the specificity of human relations, and the attitude towards time and environment.

The American consultants seem to be representatives of the universalism, as they are straightforward when it comes to business. When in doubt, Ellen appealed to Andrew and then to higher committees in order to make sure the conflict is solved. As to the Korean businessmen, they are more paricularists as they confer a personal meaning even to business acts: for instance the business cards that need to be answered in public, the drinking that welcomes one into the group.

Their openness to confessions towards performance is another sign of this dimension. With respect to the affective-neutral dimension, the U.S. is representative of the affective dimension as consultants in the case (e.g. Andrew raising his voice to the Korean management representative) express emotions freely. Raising the voice denotes anger, a very strong emotion that in Korean environment is not freely expressed. The attitude of the Koreans towards such outbursts is of understanding and patience.

(Scott's confrontational meeting with one of the Korean consultants concerning this issue of how organizational processes should be flowcharted). The Koreans consider the expression of emotions improper and avoid such emotional outbursts. Moreover, neutrality is a characteristic of Korean (business) environment. Positive and negative emotions are both repressed. For instance even emotions that reflect praise and gratitude are not encouraged, for instance when mentioning that low performance is being criticized, while achievement is not praised overtly. In terms of achievement / ascription, the U.S.

is a highly achievement-oriented culture, while Korea is an ascripted culture. Social status is derived from a person's achievement for U.S. - Ellen for instance, although a woman was accepted in the team due to her prestigious professional achievement. The Koreans derive social status from age, experience, social connections, or gender. For instance, Jack's position as the lead Korean consultant, made it difficult for Ellen to impose herself as co-project manager. This is due to gender, culture, experience.

The behavior of subordinates and superiors also reflected the Korean's respect for status and position. In what concerns time perception, there is another issue that led to conflict, as the American consultants saw the project development sequentially while the Koreans have taken the synchronic perspective, since timelines are considered malleable. Illustration of synchronic perspective are the Koreans' plan of a market study when there was no time for such endeavors and they also neglected they deadline.

Ellen stated that it was very important for the project to be completed on time, and in case that won't happen she would be held accountable for any delays. The statement above also reinforces the orientation on rules that characterize universalists (the Americans). Another important issue is the distinction specific - diffuse.

The American culture tends to be more specific - impersonal, comfortable in public space, sets and attains objectives, while Koreans are diffuse - more private, interaction is guided by authority, everything appears to be connected to everything, can easily lose face. The face loss is exemplified in the study as well as the importance of leadership for a manager. The leadership and face loss are approached by the manager in terms of disappointment (the privacy of feeling is also manifest at this point) in the individual's efforts.

The relationship to environment is discussed in terms of locus of control: the Americans are internally controlled, in that they place a lot of emphasis on attaining objectives and goals, and interpret failure as something that sometimes is unavoidable; they do not blame themselves or their capabilities. The Koreans are persistent, polite, and rejoice for successful activities and failure is assumed individually (for example Jack's humbling discourse at the Dinner as a result of his disappointment with his performance).

The most important issues that lead to conflict in this case appear to be the difference in uncertainty avoidance, several particularities concerning human relations described above, especially achievement vs. ascription. Uncertainty avoidance dimension has been detailed above. With respect to achievement vs. ascription I would like to comment upon Ellen's perceived role as a co-project manager.

Although she was accepted to be part of the team from the beginning by her Korean counterparts, her further exclusion from the teams' activities may be interpreted as a manifestation of the Koreans stereotype of women's role in organizations. It is described in the case study that women have been present only in a small percent and only recently in organizations; even fewer reached top management positions.

Ellen's presence may have been confusing, and in a culture dominated by collectivist, particular, neutral and diffuse involvement communication on this issue appears difficult. What is more likely the Koreans accepted her, respected her background and achievement but did not ask more information or suggested to their American counterparts they would prefer another consultant. Such an approach escalated the conflicts already manifest as a result of cultural values clash and was reflected in a poor communication.

Time-management seems to be another important problem on the part of the Korean consultants, as they decided, by themselves and without soliciting the American consultants' opinion to have a marketing research while they were having already difficulties in respecting the deadline. At this point, when Andrew asked assistance from the highest management structures, the project was a month behind schedule and limited progress has been made since the previous assessment of the situation. The first important alternative that may be explored is trust building.

Building trust among the SI team members involves reinforcing the communication effectiveness and facilitating rapport. Exploring cultural similarities and learning to read bodily signs as well as taking the problem in an open dialogue may prove fruitful; effective speaking, listening and non-verbal communication need to be optimized. Moreover conflict management with the entire team may prove useful. Andrew should insist upon the redefinition of roles in the hierarchical structures and re-assign tasks as well since hierarchical structure is so important for Koreans.

Insisting upon hierarchical structure may favor the understanding that cooperation may appear between managers as well. Andrew needs to explicitly assign a managerial role and decision-making power to Ellen. This may be facilitated by working on conflict management and building intercultural communication skills. In Andrew's position I would work on redesigning the formal structure with the purpose of integrating Ellen formally. From the point-of-view of demonstrating her capability she did great and she succeeded in imposing herself but only temporary.

Then, increasing awareness about cooperation at every level of the team is needed. Moreover, a clear redefinition of goals need to be done in order to increase awareness about sequentialism in such projects as a performance enhancement way. Future global consulting project teams should be trained very well in diversity aspects that belong to culture. Business etiquette and communication patterns should be the most important to consider. A recommendation I think would be important.