Case 2: Integrating Culture and Management: The GLOBE Project
Source: Cross-Cultural Communication and Management
Relevant topic: The Meanings and Dimensions of Culture
Integrating Culture and Management: The GLOBE Project
Most recently, the GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) research program reflects an additional approach to measuring cultural differences. Conceived in 1991, the GLOBE project is an ongoing research project, currently consisting of three major interrelated phases. GLOBE extends and integrates the previous analyses of cultural attributes and variables published by Hofstede and Trompenaars. The three completed GLOBE phases explore the various elements of the dynamic relationship between the culture and organizational behavior.
At the heart of phases one and two, first published in 2004 and 2007, is the study and evaluation of nine different cultural attributes using middle managers from 951 organizations in 62 countries. A team of 170 scholars worked together to survey over 17,000 managers in three industries: financial services, food processing, and telecommunications. When developing the measures and conducting the analysis they also used archival measures of country economic prosperity and of the physical and psychological well-being of the cultures studied. Countries were selected so that every major geographic location in the world was represented. Additional countries, including those with unique types of political and economic systems, were selected to create a complete and comprehensive database upon which to build the analysis. This research has been considered among the most sophisticated in the field to date, and a collaboration of the work of Hofstede and GLOBE researchers could provide an influential outlook on the major factors characterizing global cultures.
While phases one and two focus on middle management, phase three, first published in 2012, examines the interactions of culture and leadership in upper-level management positions. More than 1,000 CEOs, and more than 5,000 of their direct reports, were surveyed by 40 researchers across 24 countries. To provide compatibility across all phases of the GLOBE project, 17 of the 24 countries surveyed in phase 3 were also included in the initial study performed for phases one and two.A further explanation of phase three, which deals primarily with leadership. Table 1-8 also provides an overview of the purposes and results of the different phases.
The GLOBE study is interesting because its nine constructs were defined conceptualized, and operationalized by a multicultural team of over 100 researchers. In addition, the data in each country were collected by investigators who were either natives of the cultures studied or had extensive knowledge and experience in those cultures.
Culture and Management
GLOBE researchers adhere to the belief that certain attributes that distinguish one culture from others can be used to predict the most suitable, effective, and acceptable organizational and leader practices within that culture. In addition, they contend that societal culture has a direct impact on organizational culture and that leader acceptance stems from tying leader attributes and behaviors to subordinate norms.
The GLOBE project set out to answer many fundamental questions about cultural variables shaping leadership and organizational processes. The meta-goal of GLOBE was to develop an empirically based theory to describe, understand, and predict the impact of specific cultural variables on leadership and organizational processes and the effectiveness of these processes. Overall, GLOBE hopes to provide a global standard guideline that allows managers to focus on local specialization. Specific objectives include answering these fundamental questions:
lAre there leader behaviors, attributes, and organizational practices that are universally accepted and effective across cultures?
lAre there leader behaviors, attributes, and organizational practices that are accepted and effective in only some cultures?
lHow do attributes of societal and organizational cultures affect the kinds of leader behaviors and organizational practices that are accepted and effective?
lWhat is the effect of violating cultural norms that are relevant to leadership and organizational practices?
lCan the universal and culture-specific aspects of leader behaviors, attributes and organizational practices be explained in terms of an underlying theory that accounts for systematic differences across cultures?
Table 1-8
GLOBE’s Cultural Dimensions
Phase one of the GLOBE project identified the nine cultural dimensions:
1. Uncertainty avoidance is defined as the extent to which members of an organization or society strive to avoid uncertainty by reliance on social norms, rituals, and bureaucratic practices to alleviate the unpredictability of future events.
2. Power distance is defined as the degree to which members of an organization or society expect and agree that power should be unequally shared.
3. Collectivism I: Societal collectivism refers to the degree to which organizational and societal institutional practices encourage and reward collective distribution of resources and collective action.
4. Collectivism II: In-group collectivism refers to the degree to which individuals express pride, loyalty, and cohesiveness in their organizations or families.
5. Gender egalitarianism is defined as the extent to which an organization or a society minimizes gender role differences and gender discrimination.
6. Assertiveness is defined as the degree to which individuals in organizations or societies are assertive, confrontational and aggressive in social relationships.
7. Future orientation is defined as the degree to which individuals in organizations or societies engage in future-oriented behaviors such as planning investing in the future, and delaying gratification.
8. Performance orientation refers to the extent to which an organization or society encourages and rewards group members for performance improvement and excellence.
9. Humane orientation is defined as the degree to which individuals in organizations or societies encourage and reward individuals for being fair, altruistic, friendly, generous, caring, and kind to others.
The first six dimensions have their origins in Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. The collectivism I dimension measures societal emphasis on collectivism; low scores reflect individualistic emphasis, and high scores reflect collectivistic emphasis by means of laws, social programs, or institutional practices. The collectivism II scale measures in-group (family or organization) collectivism such as pride in and loyalty to family or organization and family or organizational cohesiveness. In lieu of Hofstede’s masculinity dimension, the GLOBE researchers developed the two dimensions they labeled gender egalitarianism and assertiveness. Likewise, the future orientation, performance orientation, and humane orientation measures have their origin in past research. These measures are therefore integrative and combine a number of insights from previous studies. Recently, further analysis has been conducted with regard to corporate social responsibility (CSR).
GLOBE Country Analysis
The initial results of the GLOBE analysis are presented in Table 1-9. The GLOBE analysis corresponds generally with those of Hofstede and Trompenaars, although with some variations resulting from the variable definitions and methodology. Hofstede critiqued the GLOBE analysis, pointing out key differences between the research methods; Hofstede was the sole researcher and writer of his findings, while GLOBE consisted of a team of perspectives; Hofstede focused on one institution and surveyed employees, while GLOBE interviewed managers across many corporations, and so on. The disparity of the terminology between these two, coupled with the complex research, makes it challenging to compare and fully reconcile these two approaches. Other assessments have pointed out that Hofstede may have provided an introduction into the psychology of culture but further research is necessary in this changing world. The GLOBE analysis is sometimes seen as complicated, but so are cultures and perceptions. An in-depth understanding of all facets of culture is difficult, if not impossible, to attain, but GLOBE provides a current comprehensive overview of general stereotypes that can be further analyzed for greater insight.
Table 1-9
Examination of the GLOBE project has resulted in an extensive breakdown of how managers behave and how different cultures can yield managers with similar perspectives in some realms, with quite divergent opinions in other sectors.One example as illustrated in Figure 1-9, shows how managers in Brazil compare to managers in the United States in a web structure, based on factors such as individualism, consciousness of social and professional status, and risky behaviors. Brazilian managers are typically class and status conscious, rarely conversing with subordinates on a personal level within or outside of work. They are known for avoiding conflict within groups and risky endeavors and tend to exhibit group dynamics with regard to decision-making processes. Managers in the United States, on the other hand, do not focus intensely on different class or status levels. They are more likely to take risks, and while it appears as though they are more individualistic, the graph implies a more tolerant attitude than direct single-person-decision-making structure. Here both Brazil and the United States show how it is important to have group communication on some level. While Americans value mutual respect and open dialogue, Brazilians may see this behavior as unacceptable, even aggressive, if discussion discloses a large amount of information and includes members from different groups; subordinate and managerial positions.
Figure 1-9
It has been suggested that if Americans are preparing to do business in Brazil, the representatives should spend an ample amount of time getting to know the Brazilian executives. Be sure to show respect for top managers, and inform subordinates of any plans or changes, encouraging feedback Managers still make the final decisions, and it is very unlikely that workers will provide any suggestions, but they also do not appreciate simply being told what to do. In other words, family structures, including in-group structures, are very important to Brazilians, but the head of the household still has the last word. Finally, stress short-term, risk-aversive goals to maintain vision and interest in business proposals.
We will explore additional implications of the GLOBE findings as they relate to managerial leadership.