Xem mẫu

BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES The car and the pedestrian You are a passenger in a car driven by a close friend. He hits a pedes-trian. You know he was going at least 35 miles per hour in an area of the city where the maximum speed allowed is 20 miles per hour. There are no witnesses. His lawyer says that if you are prepared to testify under oath that he was only driving at 20 miles per hour it may save him from serious consequences. How would you act in this case? 1. There is a general obligation to tell the truth as a witness. I will not perjure myself before the court. Nor should any real friend expect this from me. 2. Thereisageneralobligationtotellthetruthincourt,andIwill do so, but I owe my friend an explanation and all the social and financial support I can organize. 3. My friend in trouble always comes first. I am not going to desert him before a court of strangers based on some abstract principle. 4. My friend in trouble gets my support, whatever his testimony, yet I would urge him to find in our friendship the strength that allows us both to tell the truth. 5. I will testify that my friend was going a little faster than the allowed speed and say that it was difficult to read the speedo-meter. assess their personal response, we have therefore extended the original forced-choice questions to include options to reject reconcil- 44 THE ORGANIZATION OF MEANING iation (answers 1 and 3), compromise (answer 5), and reconcile from the universal to the particular (answer 2) or from the particular to the universal (answer 4). In this way we can assess both the cultural orientation of the individ-ual in the way that they approach dilemmas (more universalistic or more particularistic) and their propensity to reconcile. Let’s stress again that the central aim of this book is to help readers to improve and develop their ability to deal with dilemmas at both the personal level (dilemmas faced when working with other people) and at the level of the organization. As we’ve said, the capacity to reconcile dilemmas is how we define intercultural lead-ership competence and is a direct measure of leadership potential relevant to the twenty-first century. Thus the early model in which we would place a respondent along a conventional linear profiling scale: Figure 2.5 Linear profile is replaced by a two-dimensional assessment which shows the degree to which they choose the universalistic or particularistic approach when facing dilemmas, and the degree to which they achieve the reconciliation of these dilemmas (see Figure 2.6). Whilst the above enables you to recognize your own orientation for how you start to approach dilemmas, you now need to consider how you “finish” in dealing with them. Do you end by rejecting other ori-entations (low competence) or end by successfully reconciling opposite orientations (high competence)? 45 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Figure 2.6 Non-linear profile By combining questions that follow the logic of the above example, we have produced scales of intercultural leadership competence for each dimension, and this is the basis of our new ILAP InterCultural Leadership Assessment Profiling instrument (see www.cultureforbusiness.com). It is likely that the degree to which you reconcile is not the same for each cultural dimension. So consider those dimensions where your propensity to reconcile is lower. This model gives you a strategy to focus your attention on which dimensions you need to consider first to increase your effectiveness. If you can achieve this successfully, you are well on the way to a shared understanding with new busi-ness partners and a framework for developing your leadership competence. Our research evidence from these instruments in our new reconcilia-tion database confirms that intercultural competence, as defined by the propensity to reconcile dilemmas, correlates directly with 360° peer assessment of bottom line business performance and is a key characteristic of effective leaders. Organizations that have leaders with this competence at the individual level are effective at the cor-porate level in growing and surviving across the world in the global marketplace. 46 THE ORGANIZATION OF MEANING We can now follow this same logic through the remainder of the value dimensions. INDIVIDUALISM VERSUS COMMUNITARIANISM The second of our dimensions covering how people relate to others concerns the conflict between what each of us wants as an individ-ual, and the interests of the group to which we belong. Do we relate to others by discovering what each one of us individually wants and then trying to negotiate the differences, or do we place ahead of this some shared concept of the public and collective good? The 65,000 managers who have answered the following question have revealed their response to this dilemma. Two people were discussing ways in which one could improve the quality of life. a: One said, “It is obvious that if one has as much freedom as possible and the maximum opportunity to develop oneself, then the quality of one’s life will improve as a result.” b: Theothersaid,“Iftheindividualcontinuouslytakescareofhisfellow human beings the quality of life will improve for everyone, even if it obstructs individual freedom and individual development.” With which of the two answers do you agree most? Figure 2.7 shows the percentage of people who chose answer “a” (individual freedom) We all go through these cycles, but starting from different points and conceiving of them as means or ends. The individualist culture sees the individual as the end and improvements to collective arrange-ments as the means to achieve it. The communitarian culture sees the group as its end and improvements to individual capacities as a 47 BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES Figure 2.7 Individualism versus communitarianism (collectivism): percentage opting for individual freedom means to that end. Yet if the relationship is truly circular the decision to label one element as an end and another as a means is arbitrary. By definition circles never end; every end is also the means to another goal. The effective international leader or manager will recognize that individualism finds its fulfillment in service to the group, while group goals are of demonstrable value to individuals, only if those individuals are consulted and participate in the process of develop-ing them. The reconciliation is not easy, but it is possible. INDIVIDUALISM AND COMMUNITARIANISM BY RELIGION As can be observed there are major differences around the globe. Data mining shows that country is again the most discriminating variable. 48 ... - tailieumienphi.vn
nguon tai.lieu . vn