Intended solely for the use of Wilf Ratzburg's BCIT students.

 

A cross-national study of managerial values (abridged)

by William J. Bigoness, and Gerald L. Blakely

Journal of International Business Studies Vol 7 Issue 4 (Start Page 739-752) ; London; Fourth Quarter 1996;

...the exportability of management theories and practices is determined by the comparability of the cultural values between the exporting and importing nation...

... the comparability of the cultural values... societal values, managerial practices and the congruence between the two... has increasingly been shown to influence critical organizational outcomes...

 

 

 

 

Hofstede... reported significant national differences across four dimensions of culture...

  • power distance,
  • uncertainty avoidance,
  • individualism, and
  • masculinity...

 

...Not all studies... have supported... national differences in attitudes, work goals, or values... Harpaz... found little difference in the work goals of employees from seven industrialized nations...

 

In a study of value differences between managers from the United States, Hong Kong and the People's Republic of China, Ralston, Gustafson, Elsass, Cheung, and Terpstra... found greater individual variance than between-nation variance.

 

 

...understanding the values of the people with whom one is engaged in business is an important step in building a good crossnational working relationship...

 As business has become increasingly global, the transferability of management theories and practices across national borders and different cultures has become an increasingly debated topic... Increasingly, researchers and practitioners are concluding that the exportability of management theories and practices is determined by the comparability of the cultural values between the exporting and importing nation. As Erez [1986] noted a decade ago, societal values, managerial practices and the congruence between the two sets has increasingly been shown to influence critical organizational outcomes.

During the past decade, a number of studies have supported Erez's congruence argument. Earley [1989], for example, found that social loafing occurred in an individualistic group comprised primarily of Americans but not in a collectivistic group comprised primarily of Chinese. Morris and Pavett [1992] found that a Likert [1967] System 2 style of management was quite productive in Mexico whereas a System 3 style of management was quite productive in the United States. They concluded that their findings were due to the congruence between the management systems and cultures in the two locations. In a Russian textile factory Welsh, Luthans and Sommer [1993] found extrinsic rewards and behavioral management had significant, positive effects on performance. However, a participative management technique led to a decrease in performance...

Hofstede [1980], after surveying employees of a major United States multinational in forty countries, reported significant national differences across four dimensions of culture which he labeled power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, and masculinity. For instance, United States employees reported the highest national mean on individualism, above the mean on masculinity, and below the means on power distance and uncertainty avoidance. Employees from the Netherlands, on the other hand, were high in individualism, below the means on power distance and uncertainty avoidance, and very low on masculinity.

Kanungo and Wright [1983] found that British managers placed greater importance on individual achievement and autonomy than did French managers, whereas French managers placed greater importance on competent supervision, sound company policies, fringe benefits, security, and comfortable working conditions. Dowling and Nagel [1986] found that business majors in the United States placed greater emphasis on self-fulfillment, responsibility, and other intrinsic rewards, while Australian business majors stressed extrinsic factors. Finally, Howard, Shudo and Umeshima [1983] found that American managers valued individuality, while Japanese managers valued socially oriented qualities.

Attitudes toward business practices and priorities have also been found to differ by nationality. Bass and Eldridge [1973] found that successful managers in the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany placed a heavy emphasis on the profit-making motive. Successful managers in Denmark, however, were found to place a greater emphasis on societal concerns in making managerial decisions. Yasin, Zimmerer and Green [1989] found that Kuwaiti managers were more likely than American managers to make business decisions consistent with their own personal goals. Swedish managers were found by Laurent [1983] to express little reluctance in bypassing the hierarchical line, while Italian managers believed that bypassing the hierarchical line was a serious offense warranting either reprimanding the employee or redesigning the hierarchical structure.

Not all studies, however, have supported significant national differences in attitudes, work goals, or values. For example, Harpaz [1990] found little difference in the work goals of employees from seven industrialized nations. Schwind and Peterson [1985] reported that the values of Japanese manager trainees were more similar to United States management students than to Japanese managers. In a study of value differences between managers from the United States, Hong Kong and the People's Republic of China, Ralston, Gustafson, Elsass, Cheung, and Terpstra [1992] found greater individual variance than between-nation variance...

Ralston et al. [1992] noted that understanding managers' values is critical in a global economy, since the business philosophy of a given country depends, to a large degree, upon the values held by those in management. Furthermore, as Tung and Miller [1990] observed, understanding the values of the people with whom one is engaged in business is an important step in building a good crossnational working relationship...
. DISCUSSION
...successful multinational management hinges on an objective, informed assessment of what employees want from their jobs...

 

...societal values, managerial practices and the congruence between the two sets has a critical influence on organizational outcomes...

Analysis of the data offers support to both those who believe that values are becoming increasingly homogeneous across nations and to those who believe that value differences continue to exist across cultures...

 

 Twenty-five years ago, Sirota and Greenwood [1971] observed that successful multinational management hinges on an objective, informed assessment of what employees want from their jobs. Erez (1986), a decade ago, noted that societal values, managerial practices and the congruence between the two sets has a critical influence on organizational outcomes. As discussed previously, a growing body of evidence supports Erez's congruity perspective. Because of these findings, a considerable research effort has been devoted to identifying the values, goals and work attitudes of employees in various nations...

Analysis of the data offers support to both those who believe that values are becoming increasingly homogeneous across nations and to those who believe that value differences continue to exist across cultures. For instance, managers from each of the twelve nationalities represented in the sample ranked the four value dimensions in the same order of importance. Additionally, no national differences were found in the importance assigned the fourth value dimension (imaginative, independent and intellectual), which across all nationalities was ranked as the second most important value dimension. Apparently, regardless of nationality, managers view imagination, independence and intellectualism as very important values. Perhaps these findings indicate the extent to which these values, among these nations, have become homogeneous. Several earlier studies support these findings. For example, Elizur, Borg, Hunt, and Beck [1991] found in their study of 2,280 people from eight countries that there was substantial agreement that achievement and performing interesting work were the two most important motivating factors. Similarly, Harpaz [1990] found little difference in the work goals of employees from seven industrialized nations.

On the other hand, other findings show significant value differences across our national samples. Although the first value dimension (cheerful, forgiving, helpful, and loving) was ranked as the least important of the four value

. *William J. Bigoness is Professor of Business Administration at the Kenan-Flagler Business School at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. He received his Ph.D. degree in management from Michigan State University. His research interests include human resource management, international management and labor-management relations.

**Gerald L. Blakely is Associate Professor of Management at West Virginia University. He received his Ph.D. in management from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. His research interests include organizational behavior and human resource management.

We gratefully thank Gary D. Gady and Tracey Honycutt Sigler for their assistance with the statistical analysis contained in this paper.