What are the main advantages and disadvantages of the ethnocentric, polycentric, and geocentric approaches to staffing policy? What is each approach appropriate?
“An ethnocentric approach to staffing policy fills all key management positions in an international business with parent-country nationals” (p. 531). The advantages of the ethnocentric approach are: Overcomes lack of qualified managers in host country, unified culture, and helps transfer core competencies. The disadvantages of the ethnocentric approach are: Produces resentment in host country, and can lead to cultural myopia. An ethnocentric approach is typically appropriate for firms utilizing an international strategy. A polycentric staffing policy requires host country nationals to be recruited to manage subsidiaries, while parent country nations occupy key positions at corporate headquarters. The advantages of the polycentric approach are: Alleviates cultural myopia, and it is inexpensive to implement. The disadvantages of the polycentric approach are: Limits career mobility, and isolates headquarters from foreign subsidiaries. “ A polycentric approach is typically appropriate for firms utilizing a multidomestic strategy. A geocentric staffing policy seeks the best people for key jobs throughout the organization, regardless of nationality. The advantages of a geocentric approach are: Uses human resources efficiently, helps build strong culture and informal management network. The disadvantages of the geocentric staffing policy are: National immigration policies may limit implementation, and it is expensive to implement. A geocentric approach is typically appropriate for firms unitizing a global or transnational strategy” (Hill, p.534).
Research suggests that many expatriate employees encounter problems that limit both their effectiveness in a foreign posting and their contribution to the company when they return home. What are the main causes and consequences of these problems,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document