Institutional and Cultural Perspectives
Introduction
Despite the all pervasive talk of globalization, the seasoned international business traveler will be acutely aware of differences in the ‘way of doing things’ from country to country and from region to region. Such differences are seldom more apparent than in the field of organization and management. Not only will this traveler be aware that conventions for doing business are culture- bound, but also that systems and structures for ‘the management of people’ are uniquely determined by forces of tradition. If the business traveler were to discuss the issue of fairness of pay with a Japanese worker, the latter could well re-iterate the proverb ’The nail that sticks out should be hammered down’, thus stressing the need for egalitarianism and group compliance. The counterpart of this worker in the US however, particularly if a high performer, may well be peeved if his or her superior contribution to enterprise success is not individually recognized in financial terms. Similarly, as the recent case of the highly contested closure of the Paris branch of UK. owned retailer Marks and Spencer demonstrated. French employees’ expectations of job security (and consultation in the case of job loss) are considerably higher than those of their British counterparts. It is the purpose of this unit to assist understanding as to why observed manifestations of HR and employment practices demonstrate distinctiveness and ‘embeddedness’ within specific geographic territories. We will pursue two complementary lines of theoretical explanation, the first relating to institutional arrangements, which may be regarded as the ‘hardware’ of underlying systems for HRM, and the second concerning cultural stereotypes, which, continuing the metaphor, relate to the more intangible and psychological determinants of international diversity.
Institutional perspectives
According to the Oxford English Dictionary (2002) an institution may be defined as ‘an official organization with an
Despite the all pervasive talk of globalization, the seasoned international business traveler will be acutely aware of differences in the ‘way of doing things’ from country to country and from region to region. Such differences are seldom more apparent than in the field of organization and management. Not only will this traveler be aware that conventions for doing business are culture- bound, but also that systems and structures for ‘the management of people’ are uniquely determined by forces of tradition. If the business traveler were to discuss the issue of fairness of pay with a Japanese worker, the latter could well re-iterate the proverb ’The nail that sticks out should be hammered down’, thus stressing the need for egalitarianism and group compliance. The counterpart of this worker in the US however, particularly if a high performer, may well be peeved if his or her superior contribution to enterprise success is not individually recognized in financial terms. Similarly, as the recent case of the highly contested closure of the Paris branch of UK. owned retailer Marks and Spencer demonstrated. French employees’ expectations of job security (and consultation in the case of job loss) are considerably higher than those of their British counterparts. It is the purpose of this unit to assist understanding as to why observed manifestations of HR and employment practices demonstrate distinctiveness and ‘embeddedness’ within specific geographic territories. We will pursue two complementary lines of theoretical explanation, the first relating to institutional arrangements, which may be regarded as the ‘hardware’ of underlying systems for HRM, and the second concerning cultural stereotypes, which, continuing the metaphor, relate to the more intangible and psychological determinants of international diversity.
Institutional perspectives
According to the Oxford English Dictionary (2002) an institution may be defined as ‘an official organization with an