Think globally manage culturally

Nadeem M Firoz, Ahmad S Maghrabi, Ki Hee Kim. International Journal of Commerce & Management. Indiana: 2002. Vol. 12, Iss. 3/4;  pg. 32, 19 pgs

Subjects:

Studies,  Multiculturalism & pluralism,  Management

Classification Codes

1220 Social trends & culture,  9130 Experimental/theoretical,  2200 Managerial skills

Author(s):

Nadeem M Firoz,  Ahmad S Maghrabi,  Ki Hee Kim

Article types:

Feature

Publication title:

International Journal of Commerce & Management. Indiana: 2002. Vol. 12, Iss. 3/4;  pg. 32, 19 pgs

Source Type:

Periodical

ISSN/ISBN:

10569219

ProQuest document ID:

287619421

Text Word Count

6028

Article URL:

http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?ctx_ver=z39.88-2003&res_id=xri:pqd&rft_val_fmt=ori:fmt:kev:mtx:journal&genre=article&rft_id=xri:pqd:did=000000287619421&svc_dat=xri:pqil:fmt=text&req_dat=xri:pqil:pq_clntid=23364

Abstract (Article Summary)

Full Text (6028   words)

INTRODUCTION

Go Global

During the past 20 years, a new and fundamentally different form of international commercial activities has developed, greatly increasing worldwide economic and political interdependence. Very few countries remain isolated in the world of business. Rather than merely buying resources from and selling goods to foreign nations, Multi-National Companies (MNC) now make direct investment in fully integrated operations that cover the spectrum of goods and services. Today, MNC networks control a large and growing share of the world's technology, marketing and productive resources. Their initial reasoning for becoming multinational may have been any or all of the following: (1) to increase their markets, (2) to diversify, (3) to seek raw materials, (4) to seek new technology, (5) to seek production efficiency, (6) to avoid political battles and the red tape that goes with it, and (7) to avoid unionization and reduce labor costs. Regardless of their intent, most successful MNCs strive to the following slogan, "Think Global, Act Local." By definition, the MNC has already thought "global"; the hard part is to "act local." The biggest challenge in acting local is to understand the cultures) in which the MNC operates and go so far as to retool the very management style that got them global in the first place.

Culture to Culture

Anthropologists define culture as ways of living specific to any given group, tribe, collection, or nation of peoples. The particularities are passed on from one generation to the next. A culture acts out its ways of living in the context of social institutions, which include family, educational, religious, governmental, and business entities. It includes both conscious and unconscious values, ideas, attitudes, and symbols that shape human behavior. Every culture has its differences from the next. Within similar geographic regions, different countries have unique cultural heritages that shape values and influence the conduct of business. Multinational corporations (MNC) find that matters such as defining the appropriate goals of the firm, attitudes toward risk, dealings with employees, and the ability to curtail unprofitable operations vary dramatically from one country to the next. Further, within countries' cultural differences exist by requiring careful attention by national firms. Consider the cultural pockets of our own country: the Northeast, the South, the Southwest, the Northwest, the Midwest, and the West Coast. To an American, the distinctions come to mind immediately. But, what about the American expatriate about to embark on his first duty assignment overseas? This paper will explore the challenges encountered by management of companies that are multinational in nature. No distinction will be given to "multinational," "cross-national," transnational," or "global" structures. The term MNC will be all-inclusive. These distinctions are beyond the scope of this paper and are, for the most part, immaterial to the leadership required of management that transcends its own culture.

Research clearly shows that management styles used at home by headquarters' management teams may well be the reason why certain people are successful managers in any firm. However, research indicates that most management techniques are not portable and that cultural-specific training is desperately needed within the ranks of multinational organizations. The topic of "cultural challenge for international management," (Harris and Moran, 1996) discussed what culture is perceived to be in the minds of different executives from many diverse nations. They also illustrated the varying components of selected countries' cultural aspects relevant to business. Guy and Matlock (1996), and Carroll and Gannon (1997, Gannon, 2001), pointed out quite clearly how American managers are perceived by foreign country counterparts. Although the United States may be a world leader in ethical conduct, we are not without fault in many areas of the world, particularly when attempting to localize our own brand of ethics in foreign nations.

CULTURAL DIMENSIONS

In the 1970's, Geert Hofstede developed methods to detect and measure elements of national cultural systems that impact behavior in work situations. Hofstede's "research was extracted from an existing bank of paper-and-pencil survey results collected within subsidiaries of one large multinational business organization in 40 countries, and covering among others, many questions about values. The survey was held twice, around 1968 and around 1972, producing a total of over 116,000 questionnaires. Theoretical reasoning and statistical analysis revealed the four main dimensions on which country cultures differ. They were labeled Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism, and Masculinity. Each of the 40 countries could be given a score on these four dimensions (Hofstede, 1980). Later research, which dealt with Asians as the subject, added the dimension called "long-term orientation." By learning how each country scored on these dimensions, a human resource (HR) professional can understand the culture of a country and then implement practices that are appropriate for that culture. Descriptions of Hofstedes five dimensions follow.

Power Distance

Power distance is the extent to which the less powerful members of society accept that power is, and should be, distributed unequally. Inequality can occur in areas such as prestige, wealth, and power, or in teacher-student and parent-child relationships. Different societies put different weights on status. In corporations, inequality in power is inevitable because it serves an important function and is usually formalized in hierarchical boss-subordinate relationships.

Uncertainty Avoidance

This is the extent to which people try to avoid situations where expectations and outcomes are not clear. It is situations where people feel threatened by poorly defined or ambiguous conditions and varies considerably among people in different countries. Employees with high uncertainty avoidance would tend not to break company rules even when they think it is in the company's best interest to do so, and tend to remain within the same company for long periods of time. Prefer to work with people with long-term acquaintances and friends than with strangers (Gannon, 2001, p 11).

Indvidualism

Individualism describes the relationship between an individual and the groups to which he/she belongs. Individualism is described by Griffin and Pustay (1998) as a cultural belief that the person comes first. People with high individualism put their own interests and those of their immediate families ahead of those of others.

Masculinity (Goal Orientation)

This is aggressive and materialistic behavior of mankind. Hofstede described this dimension as masculinity vs. feminity, however, authors referring to Hofstede's study, tend to call this dimension goal orientation due to the misunderstandings using the word can evoke (Griffin and Pustay, 1998).

Long-Term Orientation

Time horizon of long-term orientation is the extent to which people within a culture have a long-term vs. a short-term outlook on work, life, and other aspects of society. Asian cultures have long-term future orientations that value hard work, perseverance and dedication. Other cultures tend to focus on the past and present, with respect for traditions and fulfillment of social obligations (Griffin and Pustay, 1998).

CULTURAL ADAPTABILITY

A very recent example of the problems encountered when crossing cultures was illustrated by the popular fast food chain of American's "Big Boy" (Frank, 2000). An arms dealer in Thailand had excess cash and four daughters with nothing to do. In 1995, American franchise chains were hot items in Thailand. The arms dealer arranged to bring the Big Boy franchise chain to Thailand to give his daughters something to do. He enlisted an Australian businessman to help him as an advisor and investor. After one year in business, no one came to the Big Boy. Mr. Smythe, the Australian investor, took over the franchise from the arms dealer and his daughters. He interviewed hundreds of customers and found some of the following reasons why the Thais were not patronizing Big Boy: 1) the restaurant's room energy was bad, 2) the Big Boy statue spooked the customers, and 3) many explained they would rather get a sweet safay, noodle bowl or grilled squid on the street for one-fifth the price of a greasy burger. "It suddenly dawned on me that there I was trying to get a 3,500-year-old culture to eat 64-year-old food," said Mr. Smythe. Giving up, he decided to leave Thailand and the business, but in one last desperate attempt to get some of his money back he changed the decor to Thai, softened the image of the statue, and added some cheap Thai dishes to the menu. He added more Thai items and some European items to satisfy workers at a nearby factory complex and completely eliminated American fare. Today, he owns four Big Boys in Thailand and is quite successful- without American fast food. Go global; think local.

There are many stories like this one to illustrate the wisdom of the "Go global . . ." mantra. Ford Motor Company had a similar experience in India in the mid-1990s with its popular Ford Escort (Hilsemath, 2000). The Escort was popular around the world, but not in India. Ford devised a completely new car, known as the Ikon. To come up with the Ikon, Ford's engineers tore apart the Ford Fiesta and remade it from wheelbase to ashtrays. The Ikon's rear headroom was raised to make way for men in turbans, doors were adjusted to open wider than normal to avoid catching the flowing saris of women, air-intake valves were fitted to avoid flooding during monsoon season, shock absorbers were toughened for pock-marked city streets, and air conditioning was beefed-up for summer heat.

GLOBAL LEADERSHIP

This new global economy clearly sets in motion forces that shift power to customers and give advantages to the local marketplace. Increasing mobility of capital, people, and ideas means that more products or concepts are introduced around the world that will eventually close the gap between countries. The success of closing this gap truly depends on many facets of business: research and development, new and old product innovation, market development, and on many more. But, the key to bringing all this together is the management that understands and is proactive with the varied cultures within which many firm chooses to operate. Management must adapt its styles of managing the different cultures just as manufacturing adapts products in order to sell them in the varying cultures of its markets. Culture gives people a sense of belonging, of how they should behave, and of what they should be doing. It impacts behavior, morale, and productivity at work and includes values and patterns that influence company attitudes and actions. Harris and Moran have compacted the major tenets of global leadership into 10 concepts:

Global Leadership -being capable of operating effectively in a global environment and being respectful of cultural diversity. Cross-Cultural Communication -recognizing what is involved in one's image of self and one's role, personal needs, values, standards, expectations, all of which are culturally conditioned.

Cultural Sensitivity -integrating the characteristics of culture in general, with experiences in specific organizational, minority, or foreign cultures.

Acculturation -effectively adjusting and adapting to a specific culture, whether that be a subculture within one's own country or abroad.

Cultural Influences on Management -understanding that management philosophies are deeply rooted in culture, and that management practices developed in one culture may not easily transfer to another.

Effective Intercultural Performance -applying cultural theory and insight to specific cross-cultural situations that affect people's performance on the job.

Changing International Business -coping with the interdependence of business activity throughout the world, as well as the subculture of the managerial group.

Cultural Synergy -building upon the very differences in the world's people for mutual growth and accomplishment by cooperation. Cultural synergy through collaboration emphasizes similarities and common concerns, and integrates differences to enrich human activities and systems.

Work Culture -applying the general characteristics of culture to the specifics of how people work at a point in time and place.

Global Culture -understanding that while various characteristics of human culture has always been universal, a unique global culture with some common characteristics may be emerging (Harris and Moran 1996).

COMMUNICATIONS

Perhaps the most basic skill that global leaders must acquire is crosscultural communications. To be clearly understood by persons who do not share our values, assumptions, or acquired methods of behaving, requires new competencies to lessen cultural differences. Samovar and Porter examine seven variables in communication that are somewhat determined by cultural acquisition. They are attitudes, social organizations, thought patterns, societal roles, language skills, space, and time sense (Samovar and Porter, 1988).

Each of these interactive communicators contains diverse meanings determinative of the cultures involved when different peoples confront each other. Other communicators that we often take for granted in a onedimensional sense come under the guise of international body language. Harris and Moran report that, "A classic study by Albert Mehrabian found the total impact of a message on a receiver is based on: 7 % words used; 38% how the words are said -tone of voice, loudness, inflection, and other paralinguistic qualities; 55 % nonverbal -facial expressions, hand gestures, body positions... (Harris and Moran 1996). It is quite interesting to find that up to 55 % of face-to-face communication between cultures may not depend at all upon language. Communication shapes the form and functioning of MNCs in the global village. For these organizations to be successful, they must develop competence in effective internal and external communication. Future selection and training studies might include not only qualitative descriptions of cultural contexts but also quantitative studies of individuals and their ability to function effectively in intercultural settings. Studies might ascertain positive and negative intercultural personality and perceptual styles to assess candidates' cognitive development for intercultural communication" (Chapels, 1997).

ETHICS

The world of business ethics, many decades ago being a murky topic of brief discussion, is at the forefront of business culture in most developed nations. "Throughout the world, examples of problematic or unethical behaviors among managers are routinely highlighted by the media and concerned citizens. Bribery, sexual harassment, patent or copyright infringements, lying and deceit about product information and safety, deliberate use of harmful substances, intentional environmental pollution, discrimination, dangerous working conditions, violations of promises, and other similar types of behavior are widely discussed and frequently condemned" (Carroll and Gannon, 1997). Recent cases of ethical breaches, the cigarette industry for one, have pointed out the potential cost of dishonest behavior. On the other hand, there is little evidence that being unusually ethical is related to exceptional economic performance. Ethical practices in a lone country that are not practiced in another country may, indeed, put the MNC in financial jeopardy. For instance, there are laws in the United States against bribes, kick- backs, and racket-influenced corrupt activities (Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977). However, in many countries these practices are an accepted way of doing business. One could say that what we consider unlawful is merely part of another country's culture. The typical MNC operates in many countries around the world and must face a myriad of laws and customs or norms of behavior that can be quite confusing. What is considered unacceptable business practices in one nation might be quite acceptable in another. High interest in international business ethics reflects recent trends of creating a global economic village and rapidly brings cross-cultural management into focus. Perhaps the one incentive for everyone to compete on a level playing field will eventually diminish the perceived need for unethical behaviors. Most assuredly, economic sanctions may well lead to enabling legislation in countries where such things as patents and copyrights have no legal precedence. Until then, business ethics will remain a considerable issue for management in crosscultural affairs. Culture can influence managerial ethical behaviors directly because managers internalize cultural values (Gannon, 2001).

UNDERSTAND YOUR OWN CULTURE

Before an American can assume the role of manager in a foreign culture, he must attempt to understand where he is coming from. American executives have inherited cultural biases of individualism, simplicity, and superiority that contradicts the characteristics of global thinking, namely systemic, complex, and multicultural thought's (Barnett and Weathersby, 1995: 20). Many management experts and recent economic experiences (e.g. the Asian market collapse in 1998) emphasize the need for American executives to understand and assimilate the concept of global thought. Critics of American business lament over the perceived inability of American management to think in innovative, expansive, and global ways. This critique has been validated by two studies: one indicating, "Americans were least successful in building widespread quality circles, and another indicating Americans to be among the least innovative countries in the maritime industry (Barnett and Weathersby, 1995: 7). According to Barnett and Weathersby, global thinking is systemic, complex, and multicultural; executives who are skilled in global thought possess the ability to think in terms of systems, the skill to solve complex problems, and a view of the executive as a world citizen. Barnett and Weathersby go on to say that Americans must learn to dispense their acquired cultural barriers to the three tenets of global thinking; i.e., individualism to systemic, complexity to simplicity, and superiority to multicultural. In another unrelated study conducted by Guy and Mattock, American managers did not fair well with other multinational managers. This study found that Americans are perceived as "arrogant, enterprising, superficial, money-oriented, open, and uncultured" (Guy and Mattock 1996).

Before an American can be a successful leader among different cultures, he must clearly understand his own culture and be wary of imposing his culture or traditions on those of other cultures. Those managers that make no attempt to internalize local culture validate the ugly American syndrome that stereotypes all of us in an unwanted and unjustified manner. Harris and Moran characterize the American culture as freedom-- loving and self-reliant; work-oriented and efficient; friendly and informal; competitive and aggressive; and generous. They also proclaim that the American culture is in the midst of a profound change and, perhaps, an identity crisis. The following factors are thought to be contributing to the challenge of maturity.

* The lessening of world leadership and influence forces a reassessment of the national self-image. After much success in its war abroad, Korea and Vietnam proved to be costly and questionable conflicts that mass media brought into American homes. The assassinations of the country's leaders in the 1960s led to an undermining of the national will, organized public protests, and the need to express national goals. In the 1980s, the American economy was robust [as it is today]; patriotism was high, entrepreneurial and high technology ventures flourished. However, in the 1990s corporations have downsized causing the loss of many jobs; the government is attempting to be in touch with the people again and Americans were stunned and frustrated by acts of terrorism at the World Trade Center and the federal building in Oklahoma City.

* Latinization of the U.S., caused by heavy immigration, is affecting the character of the country and its communication.

* Social unrest exists, particularly over the increase in violence, racism, and a growing underclass. There is concern about two societies, one colored & one white, that view the American experience quite differently. Increasing acts of terrorism alarm citizens.

* Transition into a post-industrial society is happening first and faster in the U.S. than in most other countries in the world because of scientific and technological advances. The values and life-styles brought on by the industrial stage of development are being reexamined and new replacements sought for more effective coping in cyber culture (Harris & Moran, 1996: 211-218).

Harris and Moran continue with the American business scene by explaining that American negotiators are not foiled by confrontation; rather this is viewed as an opportunity to exchange viewpoints that will lead to negotiation and resolution. In these conflicts, the American will use his skills and his individualism to accomplish the positions of his company or his country. We are a friendly bunch given to bouts of informality with little attention to formal protocol on our own ground. Although we are informal and relaxed, we use our words wisely and usually mean exactly what we say. Edward T. Hall has suggested the concept of high and low context communication as a way of understanding different cultural orientations. The American communicates in a low-context nature, which means that messages are explicit. Words carry most of the information in communication. In low context culture one gets down to business quickly. In a high context culture it takes considerably longer to conduct business because of the need to know more about a businessperson before a relationship develops. In Asia, if you are not willing to take the time to sit down and have a cup of green tea with people, you have a problem (Cateora, 2001: 123).

In high-context culture, such as France, Japan, and most of the Middle East, less information is contained in the verbal part of the message. Much more information resides in the context of communication, including the background, associations, and basic values of the communicators (Hall, 1976, pp 85-86). We Americans also consider time important and make every attempt to control the allotted time permitted for certain events and do not consider being "fashionably late" as appropriate in our business culture. We also tend to trust our counterparts and the information given until we have a basis for withholding our trust. The process of decision-making has become more decentralized over time, allowing certain empowered individuals to bind the corporation with merely their word. This is unheard of in many parts of the world, particularly in parts of Asia where business decisions are made only by consensus. It does appear, however, that our initial sense of isolationism is about over. We have become much more global in our thinking in the past decade or so. This has happened for many disparate reasons: the expansions of MNCs, the immigration of many different cultures, the increase of foreign students and professionals in our global village, quicker and more affordable world travel, and the infusion of more foreign capital to our economy, to name a few.

INTERNATIONAL EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT

With more companies seeking profits outside their domestic markets, international executive development has emerged as an important weapon in the battle for global success.

Shirley B. Dreifus, has compiled a list of key trends in the development and training of international managers:

* A mix of expatriates and third-country nationals (TCN), and locals in the company.

* Equal opportunity for all. No more distinctions of host and home.

* Overseas experience a plus.

* The global executive -an individual who takes on several consecutive international assignments and eventually assumes a senior management position at headquarters.

* Putting high-potential people to the international side of the business.

* Fast- tacking young executives are actively recruited by internationally companies.

* International Management curriculum is offered in management training programmes.

* New emphasis on language.

* Family preparation. Research confirms that the majority of unsuccessful overseas experiences result from spouse or family-adjustment problems (Dreifus (1992).

WHAT HOST THINKS OF US AS AMERICANS

In spite of the key trend above, we Americans seem to have a much more difficult road ahead of us than one might expect. At a recent world gathering at an executive training seminar in Lausanne, Switzerland, a central topic was the booming American economy. Among Europeans, who were the bulk of participants, the reaction was a mixture of respect and disregard. Many expressed envy of American technology, entrepreneurial spirit, productivity and everything to do with the Internet revolution; but they also spoke disapprovingly of American businessmen. Among their chief complaints: "Americans are provincial, ignorant of world affairs, crude, and too materialistic. " Some of the complaints sound a bit much like sour grapes: "[American managers] don't speak any language beside English, don't know how or when to eat and drink properly, and don't know anything about European history, let alone geography. " Then they ask themselves, "How can they be beating us?" Some of the Germans complained of the American openness when addressing their European counterparts by their first name. U.S. executives who have run businesses on the Continent say Americans also have to meet their foreign colleagues halfway, by educating themselves about European culture and not assuming the American way is always the best way (Hymowitz, 2000). As with most controversies, there are two sides to the coin. The correspondent reporting on the above seminar that took place in Lausanne received many responses. Some felt that Europeans had a misguided notion of Americans. Instead of wondering, "How can Americans be beating us?" they said, "Europeans should acknowledge that their reluctance to break with traditions such as steep taxes, rigid union work rules, and unresponsive hierarchical management structures have left them behind. " One executive noted in this article that he is ". . . quite familiar with European history and culture and speaks Ukrainian and Russian ... [but] while knowing five or six languages is great, if almost everyone speaks English, why waste time learning French or German? We're the dominant economy and culture and should not look back. " Another said: "Europeans should take a look in the mirror, and see what their hierarchical management structure has and hasn't done for them." "What's more," he continues, "their emphasis on languages is motivated by economic more than cultural factors. How many Germans and French know Spanish? They haven't found a compelling reason to learn it since Spain is still a relatively small economic force. It all comes down to what your life experiences necessitate." Executives who have lived and worked in Europe contend that many Europeans are intolerant of diversity in their workplace and are unwilling to mobilize an array of talent. " A lot of their talk about culture is really about racism," said Jonathan Ornstein, chairman and CEO of Mesa Airlines in Phoenix who spent three years as CEO of Brussels-based Virgin Airlines. He remembered how, in that former position, one of the managers asked his permission to hire several black employees, saying he was worried about the repercussions. Subsequently, local union officials complained that the black employees should not have been hired for desk jobs at the airport because they did not speak Flemish. Mr. Ornstein, the CEO, countered that he didn't either. Many respondents felt that while Americans who want to expand their businesses globally agree that they should be sensitive to cultural differences; the same rule should apply to foreign executives. As for the charge that American managers are uncouth and ill-mannered, American managers retorted that some of their foreign counterparts could benefit from lessons in etiquette: "Well-dressed (European) gentlemen thought nothing of shoving me with their elbows to get on the bus ahead of me," complained Chikako Lorenzetti, a translator and interpreter at Nippon Express USA in Secaucus, New Jersey. "Whenever I encountered Americans, I felt a sense of relief from the stiff selfish Europeans with their superior attitudes. " Others say they willingly accept the view that Americans are materialistic. "You bet I am," said Mr. Griffith of Simulation Services. "I suppose I would trade some of it for five weeks of vacation every year I'd like to attend a language school, but I don't have the time," he adds (Hymowitz, (b) 2000).

CONCLUSION

The Past Lessons

The historic pattern of many companies, adding international divisions, was to impose the home country system on their overseas operations. (Thompson and Richter, 1998). For a short time, organizations could get by with this approach because the strategy was simply to exploit the resources or market opportunities that came in new territories, rather than to execute a multinational strategy. However, as overseas operations became more significant and more autonomous, these approaches were superseded by practices that were more consistent with specific national cultures.

Future Cultural Challenges

All is well now because our economy is booming, but what about the future when we may be dependent on the European economy? Several studies have stressed the need for continuing research to understand the challenges of culture that face the U.S. executive in cross-cultural environments. Anisya Thomas and Stephen Mueller suggest, "culture, representing the shared values and beliefs of a society, is an important contextual factor affecting the number of potential managers in a given community, region, or country. Identifying the nature of the relationship between culture and management can provide governments with information necessary for targeted programs intended to motivate new venture creation and thereby increase employment and add to the nation's economic vitality and flexibility" (Thomas and Mueller, 2000). Griffith et al., on the other hand, advocates that, "The myriad of cultural differences across countries plays a vital role in shaping business relationships. Thus a continued research effort is needed to develop a strong theoretical framework for understanding culture's influence in international business relationships (Griffith et al., 2000). "Neelankavil's and others' study have important implications for researchers interested in understanding cross-cultural differences in managerial practices as well as for practitioners interested in doing business in the four countries. This study serves as a basis for conducting further comparative studies involving these countries/cultures (Neelankavil et al., 2000)."

Future Corporate Challenges

Within a multinational company, Human Resource professionals are charged with the task of hiring, retaining, motivating and rewarding employees in different countries all around the world. In an ideal situation, there would be a Human Resources person who knows the local customs and cultures in every country where there are employees. Unfortunately, companies cannot always afford such a luxury. Instead, it is incumbent upon the HR representative in one country to reward and motivate the employees of a different country. To be successful in this endeavor, he/she should learn the culture of the country within which he/she will be developing pay policies. HR professionals will fail if the policies and practices are not relevant and positive for each national culture in which they are applied. Organizations need to think globally, but act locally - with a full appreciation of the diversity of local cultures.

When developing global pay strategies, companies need to address the fact that those strategies will be implemented across a broad range of different cultures. HR professionals must ensure that the global strategy, and the work culture it drives, do not conflict with practices and perceptions in specific national cultures. Major global companies must recognize that policies need to be managed with the broad context of business strategy and integrated into the work culture with the support of all elements of human resources management. The ultimate shape of the package of HR programs and practices, everything from management processes to the kind of people the organization selects, are dependent on the national cultures of the various countries in which there are operations.

Next, the company's strategy should be to have each country's operation expand within its own potential, although not necessarily within its own boundaries. From that perspective, there is no need for common human resources processes or reward programs. Each country and its own international operations does what is reasonable in terms of local managers' perceptions. Most currently, companies are accommodating national cultural differences while preserving work culture principals that encourage people to effectively execute the company's strategic objectives (Thompson and Richter, 1998).

Even to the casual observer, it is apparent that culture, a society's programming of the mind, has both a pervasive and changing influence on each national business environment. Global managers must recognize the influence of culture and be prepared to either respond to it or change it. Human behavior is a function of both a person's own unique personality and that person's interaction with the collective forces of the particular society and culture in which he has lived. The cross-cultural challenges for management practice are clearly an area where more up-to-date research and scientific study are required.