While universal advice cannot be given , every country has to face dilemas: - in relation to time
- in relationships with people
- in relation to natural environment
The reserach in this book shows that there are different ways to approach these dilemmas in different countries because each country has its own culture .
The managers examined to make up the data base of this reaserch have two different ways of building the moral edifice: universalism ( to give priority to universal rule) or particularism ( to give priority to your affection for particular people).
It is important to give status to achieveres but it is also important to back people who are not achievers. The culture is the manner in which these mentioned dilemmas are reconciled beacuse every country searchs its best way to find integrity.
PROBLEMS FOR THE CROSS- CULTURE MANAGER
In this paragrah different solutions are shown:
• The matrix organitation: reconciliation through discipline and function and taking into account customer specifications. • Management by objectives: to get that individuals fulfil the key objectives • Pay- for- perrformance : To reward to employees in proportion to their achivements.
These solutions don´t work in the same way in different countries. There is a clear example of an American computer company in both in USA and Middle East. The solution of pay- for permormance worrked well in USA but didn´t in Middle East.
Centralization versus decentralization
The differenece between them is very subtle. It is not true that differenciated activities of the same Company take you away of your core business.
Decentralization is not easy for Japanese managers because of the culture but the research shows that centralization and decentralization are potentially reconciliable processes. It is successful for some companies to have different activities in the countries they are, above all, if they are underdeceloped countries. For example, Shell helps Philipinnes to raise pigs and it makes that the comunist insurgents don´t blow up thei oil pipes. That is a great difference.
Quality not quantity in decentralization
The book says that what is important is the quality of decentralization and not the quantity. Some decisions vcan be taken centrally but others locally depending on the country in which the company is installed. For example, the price can be a local decision but finincing can be a centralized decision.
International and transnational Companies
According to Christopher Barlett and Sumatra Ghoshal golbal and multinational companies are centralized because their subsidiaries relate to the head company or country.
On the other hand, intrenational and transnational companies try very hard to overcome the dilemma of centralization and decentralization. But they do it in different ways: The international company moves out influence from its centre to regions and nations while the transnational company loses its centre in favour of polycentric influences. For example ,Shell is an international corporation which have top management teams formed by Germans, Dutch, French, Italian and Japanese executives at the Company Head Quarters. These people are not delegates in a foreign country but contributors to multi- cultural management and the haed quarter behaves like a consultant rather than a policeman.
The transnational corporation is polycentric, that is to say, they have several centres of specialized excellence. An example of this kind of Company is IKEA. In the transnational company influenece can start in any country and this kind of company accumulates value as it goes to reconcile the differences of culture.
Human–resource management in the future
Companies that are successful in reconciling centralization versus decentralizarion dilemma have learned to move their employees internationally, how to work...