Conceptualization and Measurement of Cultural †MyAssignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about the Conceptualization and Measurement of Cultural. Answer: Introduction The global business and commercial framework has undergone considerable changes and experienced huge dynamics over centuries, owing to the changes in the social, economic, political, technological and demographics patterns in the international scenario. Over the years the global commercial scenario has become more integrated, inclusive and complex, much of which can be attributed to the international phenomena like Globalization, liberalization of trade and industrial sectors of different countries, technological and infrastructural innovations and other aspects (Peng 2016). These factors have enabled a considerably large and increasing numbers of businesses to expand their domain of operations from their base countries to other countries across the world. Expansion of businesses to different geographical domains, however, include incorporation of different aspects and challenges in the operational framework. Of these the primary challenges which the businesses face while setting up their operations in foreign countries are the challenges in the aspects of cultural differences, language barriers, communicational differences as well as the differences in the way of living and working of the people in the different countries (Ferraro and Briod 2017). These differences pose crucial challenges particularly in the domain of management of human resources in the company, which in turn has considerable implications on the success of the venture of the company in foreign country and the sustainability of its operations and prospects (Aronczyk 2013). Keeping this into consideration the essay tries to take into account the working of an Australian spices and condiments company, named The Naturo Condiments, and its operations in the Tokyo branch in Japan, especially emphasizing on the differences in their strategies of human resource management which they have to take in the two different operational bases in Australia and Japan. The essay tries to analyse the factors influencing the development and implementation of the human resource management strategies in their subsidiary in Japan and the reasons behind such differences in the strategic framework for Australia and for Japan. Importance of Incorporation of Cultural Differences Given the fact that the businesses in the contemporary framework are increasingly going global, cross cultural communication and management of human resources keeping into consideration the cultural differences between the different countries of operations become immensely important in the operational framework of the companies and The Naturo Condiments is no exception (Okoro 2012). Successful incorporation of cultural differences, in every aspect of their operations, especially in the management of the human resources, especially in their Tokyo branch can help them in having productive negotiations, a productive work environment and better prospects. However, to achieve the same, it is of utmost importance to analyse and observe the cultural differences which are prevalent in the companys two operational bases- their country of origin, Australia and the country where they have their subsidiary, Japan. Both of the countries in concern are rich in their own indigenous culture and lifestyle patterns which have evolved over the years and shaped up in terms of their own history, geographical location, natural resources, occupations, populations, principles of importance and mindsets (Piekkari, Welch and Welch 2014). Culture, as a whole shows the ideas, customs as well as the behavioural patterns of the residents of a society and is also a reflection of the intellectual achievement of the population of the different societies, evolved and modified with time. These aspects are thus, considerably important factors contributing to the success or failure of the cross-country business ventures and are therefore required to be analysed and c onsidered by the company in concern, especially while framing their business and operational strategies (Adekola and Sergi 2016). There have been different measures and indices developed over the years for the purpose of measuring the cultural differences and patterns in different countries. For the concerned research, the essay uses one of the most popular methods, known as the Hofstedes Cultural Dimension Theory (Taras, Steel and Kirkman 2012). With the help of the same, the essay tries to find the cultural differences between the countries in concern, Australia and Japan, with respect to six dimensions, which are likely to affect the human resource management of the concerned firm, in its subsidiary in Japan. Power Distance- The power distance index in the Hofstede framework reflects towards the distribution of power in the society and the level of acceptance of the inequality in the same by those who rank low in the aspects of power. A high value in this index indicates towards the presence of unquestioned hierarchical structure in the society where as a low value points towards the fact that in the concerned society power is more equally distributed and people have the right to question authority (Moran, Abramson and Moran 2014). As is evident from the above figure, Australia scores much lower (36) than Japan (54) in the index of power distance. In the organizations of Australia, the hierarchical construct is mainly built for convenience of the operations and the level of accessibility of communication of the superiors enjoyed by the subordinates are higher. Communication channels are also more informal and less tensed and not burdened with excessive protocols and regulations. On the other hand, there is a borderline hierarchical situation present in Japan (Warner 2014). The juniors need to maintain some distance and a level of respect while communicating with the seniors and the communication channels are also more formal. Individualism and Collectivism- This index shows the degree of integration among the individuals in a society. The societies ranking high on Individualism indicates towards the presence of individuals with direct and robust relations with their immediate family members and emphasizing on the welfare of their own and their immediate family (Triandis 2018). On the other hand, collective societies show strong integrated relations among the individuals and their extent families as well as other members of the society, with high loyalty among the in-group members. Australia, in this dimension score extremely high on individualism (90) as compared to Japan (46). This in turn indicates towards a highly individualistic culture in Australia, where people are mainly concerned about their own welfare and success and are expected to take care of themselves and their family members. In the work-front, thus, hiring and promotions are earned on the basis of capabilities and merits. Japan, on the other hand shows more collectivist trends than Australia, which in turn indicates towards the presence of a well-knit society, where individuals are concerned about each others welfare and where achievements are measured in terms of collective success of individuals in the in-groups (Mouer and Sugimoto 2013). Japanese are also seen to be more connected and loyal to the organizations in the work front and tend to be more emotionally attached to the same than the Australians. Masculinity and Femininity- A masculine society, according to this dimension, is characterized by their preference for heroism, materialistic achievements and rewards for success and assertiveness. On the other hand, a society scoring high in the respect of femininity shows strong trends of cooperation caring for the weaker sections, modesty, fellow feeling and preference towards an overall better quality of life (Hofstede, Jonker and Verwaart 2012). The score of Australia in this index is 61, which indicates that it is to some extent a Masculine society, where the individuals are driven by the ideas of competition and individual success and achievements, with the desire of becoming the winner or the best. The hiring and promotional decisions are also based on the individual success of the employees and their capabilities to achieve. Japan, on the other hand, scores 95 in this index and is one of the most Masculine countries in the global scenario (Bergiel, Bergiel and Upson 2012). However, their masculinity is not observed in the form of loudly competitive individuals due to the presence of collectivism in the society. In Japan, competitions generally take place among different groups with the objective of attaining excellence and perfection. In the workplaces also, the employees are seen to be motivated if there exist competitions among different groups and if they collectively win in different aspects (Dasgupta 2012). Japanese are also found to be excessively workaholic which is an expression of their masculinity and which also indicates towards the difficulties faced by the women workers to climb the corporate ladder. Uncertainty Avoidance- This shows the level of acceptance of new ideas and thoughts and level of experimenting and risk-taking attitudes of the societies. High scores reflect towards societies more inclined towards stiff regulations and guidelines and a tendency to go by the absolute truths and conventional flows. Low scoring societies, on the other hand, are more open and accepting towards new thoughts and ideas and there exists a free-flowing environment in the societies where there are less regulations and more ambiguity. Australia scores significantly lower (51) than Japan (92) in this context, which indicates towards the presence of a comparatively free flowing and more accepting society in the former where new ideas are easily pitched and heard and are often implemented (Matusitz and Musambira 2013). Japan is one of the most uncertainty avoiding societies, much of which can be attributed to their natural vulnerabilities which forces them to be always prepared. Life in Japan, is thus highly ritualized and people tend to prefer following conventions than experimenting new things. In the professional environment, the workers abide by strict corporate norms and etiquettes and business decisions are taken and new ideas are implemented after detailed and long-term discussion and exploration of empirical evidences (Frijns et al. 2013). Long-term and Short-term Orientation- The degree of linkage with past while dealing with present situations is reflected in this index. Low scoring societies are basically normative ones who adhere to age-old traditions and conventions, while the high scoring ones are more pragmatic in nature. Australia (scoring 21) is a normative society, giving more priorities to their traditions than on new ways of thinking. They also tend to have much lower propensity to save for future betterment. Japan (scoring 88) is considerably long term oriented, with the residents living by the virtues of good practical examples. In the commercial scenario, Japan is always seen to be investing in constant research and development, even at the cost of sacrificing short term lavish expenditures as the primary notion working behind this is that the corporate responsibility is not of making profits but of ensuring a larger contribution in the development of the future society (Stone, Luminet and Takahashi 2015). Indulgence and Restraint- As is evident from the terms, in indulgent societies people do not tend to control their own individual desires and impulses. However, in the restrained ones, there exists higher control over desire and indulgences. Australia is primarily an indulgent country (71), where the individuals are free to fulfil their desires and indulge in enjoying life, with greater optimism. On the other hand, Japan is more of a restrained society, with not much priority on leisure and fulfilment of individual desires (Beugelsdijk, Maseland and Hoorn 2015). The social norms in the society actually make the individuals feel that lavish indulging is a way of wrongdoing on the society. From the above discussion, it can be seen that there exist clear differences in the cultural differences in every aspect of human lives in Australia and Japan, which are expected to have considerable implications on the business decisions of the concerned company and can also be posing as challenges for the firm to employ and manage local employees in Japan. The company, being originally from Australia and being habituated in the Australian business environment, may face difficulties in terms of building a proper infrastructure within the human resource management domain of their subsidiary in Tokyo, Japan, due to the presence of considerable differences in the mindsets, expectations, way of working, communication and level of acceptances of the workers in the two concerned countries, which have been shown in the above discussion. Taking the above problem of concern into consideration, the only plausible way out for the concerned company, in terms of proper management of the operations in both the countries, is to incorporate the inherent institutional differences between Australia and Japan in the designing of the human resource management in these countries. The institutional differences which are to be taken into consideration are as follows: Employee relations- While designing the human resource management framework, the company needs to take into account that in Japan, employees tend to be abiding by hierarchical construct and are more comfortable in a strict corporate regulated framework, with proper dressing, talking and working (Shenkar 2012). The decision-making can also take longer time than that of Australia as it has to pass through different levels before being accepted and executed. Japanese are generally workaholic in nature and tend to thrive for excellence. The sense of community and working in groups, for achievement of combined goals is also highly prevalent in Japan than working individually, for individual achievement, which in common Australia (Brewster 2017). Reward and Recognition- One of the primary aspect of human resource management in any business organization is the structure of reward and recognition prevailing in the company, as the same has considerable impacts on the motivation of the employees and their performances, which in turn have direct implications on the performance of the organizations in the long run. In this context, considerable differences exist in the perception of rewards and recognitions by the employees in Australia and in Japan. Australia being a more individualistic society than Japan, employees tend to appreciate individual recognition and rewarding of their personal efforts more. Therefore, the organization needs to give individual attention and recognition to the workers and their achievements in their works to keep them motivated (Greenberg and Colquitt 2013). On the other hand, in Japan, the workers are not in general accustomed to individual recognition as they tend to keep the success of their groups over their individual achievements. In such scenario, rewarding and recognizing one employee exclusively may be seen as a form of separation of the same from his or her group, which can be perceived to be a selfish move and may not be welcomed by the employee himself or herself. Thus, while designing the human resource management strategies in Japan, the company needs to be more focussed on recognizing the achievement and success of the groups as a whole and rewarding the group as a whole, which in turn can help in motivating the workers in the group significantly. Work Environment- The work environment prevailing in the business organizations of Australia, there usually exists a free-flowing framework facilitating free flow of ideas and innovations and the companies also tend to be more accepting and experimenting in these aspects. However, while operating in Japan, the concerned firm needs to take into account the fact that the employees in the country are not as open and accepting or experimenting as those in Australia (Deresky 2017). Thus, they may not be easily accepting new modes of working and new work place arrangements and may only accept the same after sufficient investigation and discussion about the same. Also due to greater workaholism and desire for excellence, there may be strict competitions among the different groups. However, this is not something to be worried about as due to their mild and conservative nature, the competition is expected to stay confined to productive activities only. Career Development- Japanese workers tend to be less concerned about sole monetary benefits than their Australian counterparts. While one of the major objectives of the workers in their career development path is to earn more, the Japanese workers view development in their job roles and increased contribution to the future society as parts of their career development along with the increase in the monetary benefits (Bloom et al. 2012). These, have to be taken into consideration, by the concerned company, while designing their employees career development structure, as employee retention, motivation and satisfaction significantly depend on the same. Thus, from the above discussion, it can be asserted that there exist significant institutional differences in the corporate scenario of Japan and Australia, much of which stem from their inherent cultural diversities and differences in the overall thought process and mindset. These differences being significantly high, it is not a beneficial option for the company in consideration, to have one particular standardized Human Resource Policy framework for both the countries, because that would cause excessive over generalization and biases (Brewster et al. 2016). To keep the employees in both the countries motivated and eager to work with the organization, Naturo Condiments need to respect their diversities and incorporate the same in the human resource management framework. Conclusion The above discussion makes it evident that there exist significant cultural differences in Japan and in Australia, which have impacts on all the aspects of the life of the residents of both the countries, specifically on their professional domains. These differences lead to the creation of considerable diversities in the institutional aspects of the business organizations. Taking this into consideration, Naturo Condiments, which is an Australian company by origin, needs to take these differences into consideration while designing their human resource management framework, especially for their subsidiary in Japan. Forming country specific frameworks seem to be more plausible and profitable for the concerned organization in this aspect, than applying the same standardized policy structure on the human resource system to their operational bases in both the countries. References Adekola, A. and Sergi, B.S., 2016.Global business management: A cross-cultural perspective. Routledge. Aronczyk, M., 2013.Branding the nation: The global business of national identity. Oxford University Press. Bergiel, E.B., Bergiel, B.J. and Upson, J.W., 2012. Revisiting Hofstede's dimensions: Examining the cultural convergence of the United States and Japan.American Journal of Management,12(1), p.69. Beugelsdijk, S., Maseland, R. and Hoorn, A., 2015. Are scores on Hofstede's dimensions of national culture stable over time? A cohort analysis.Global Strategy Journal,5(3), pp.223-240. Bloom, N., Genakos, C., Sadun, R. and Van Reenen, J., 2012. Management practices across firms and countries.The Academy of Management Perspectives,26(1), pp.12-33. Brewster, C., 2017. The integration of human resource management and corporate strategy. InPolicy and practice in European human resource management(pp. 22-35). Routledge. Brewster, C., Houldsworth, E., Sparrow, P. and Vernon, G., 2016.International human resource management. Kogan Page Publishers. Dasgupta, R., 2012.Re-reading the salaryman in Japan: Crafting masculinities. Routledge. Deresky, H., 2017.International management: Managing across borders and cultures. Pearson Education India. Ferraro, G.P. and Briody, E.K., 2017.The cultural dimension of global business. Taylor Francis. Frijns, B., Gilbert, A., Lehnert, T. and Tourani-Rad, A., 2013. Uncertainty avoidance, risk tolerance and corporate takeover decisions.Journal of Banking Finance,37(7), pp.2457-2471. Greenberg, J. and Colquitt, J.A. eds., 2013.Handbook of organizational justice. Psychology Press. Hofstede, G.J., Jonker, C.M. and Verwaart, T., 2012. Cultural differentiation of negotiating agents.Group Decision and Negotiation,21(1), pp.79-98. Hofstede-insights.com (2018).Country Comparison - Hofstede Insights. [online] Hofstede Insights. Available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/australia,japan/ [Accessed 9 Apr. 2018]. Matusitz, J. and Musambira, G., 2013. Power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and technology: analyzing Hofstede's dimensions and human development indicators.Journal of Technology in Human Services,31(1), pp.42-60. Moran, R.T., Abramson, N.R. and Moran, S.V., 2014.Managing cultural differences. Routledge. Mouer, R. and Sugimoto, Y., 2013.Images Of Japanese Society Hb. Routledge. Okoro, E., 2012. Cross-cultural etiquette and communication in global business: Toward a strategic framework for managing corporate expansion.International journal of business and management,7(16), p.130. Peng, M.W., 2016.Global business. Cengage learning. Piekkari, R., Welch, D. and Welch, L.S., 2014.Language in international business: The multilingual reality of global business expansion. Edward Elgar Publishing. Shenkar, O., 2012. Cultural distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences.Journal of International Business Studies,43(1), pp.1-11. Stone, C.B., Luminet, O. and Takahashi, M., 2015. Remembering Public, Political Events: A Cross?Cultural and?Sectional Examination of Australian and Japanese Public Memories.Applied Cognitive Psychology,29(2), pp.280-290. Taras, V., Steel, P. and Kirkman, B.L., 2012. Improving national cultural indices using a longitudinal meta-analysis of Hofstede's dimensions.Journal of World Business,47(3), pp.329-341. Triandis, H.C., 2018.Individualism and collectivism. Routledge. Warner, M., 2014.Culture and management in Asia. Routledge.