Qualities of a Successful International Manager in China

The rapid growth of globalisation and internationalisation of trade in resources, especially human capital, has made managerial of culture differences ever so important as to understanding the different variables (Hofstede G, 2010). In this paper, the Power Distance Index (PDI) of both Chinese and aboriginal traditional cultural value and belief in family, social life and workplace is going to be examined under the scope of Hofstede’s dimensions. To a truthful stereotype, both culture heavily emphasis upon power distance in a form of age-grade social hierarchy, the variance in its operation however made these cultures unique. The value and beliefs of Confucianism has embedded upon every aspect of Chinese life, putting emphasis upon power

Understanding the differences and similarities inherent in other cultures may provide opportunities when working with individuals (or groups) who may have different cultural values, beliefs, and/or norms. There are multiple ways to explore different cultures. One way is through Hofstede’s (2017) cultural dimension; which are currently made up of six broad categories, including high-low power distance, individualism-collectivism, masculinity-femininity, uncertainty avoidance, long-short term orientation, and indulgence-restraint. It is beyond the scope of this paper to explore all these cultural dimensions in great detail; however, it is important to understand some of the implications of these scores. The scores for both the US and China can be seen in Table 1, along with the differences between each score.

Collectivism-> is basically when you think that values and the goals of the group and the common good over the goals of any one individual are the most beneficial. It stresses human interdependence and the importance of a collective, rather than the importance of separate individuals

“Individualism is the idea that the individual’s life belongs to him and that he has an inalienable right to live as he sees fit, to act on his own judgement, to keep and use the product of his effort, and to pursue the causes of his choosing.” My take on individualism, is basically that we can control ourselves, we can do what we want with restrictions to keep those that stand by us safe. Individualism is a way of a society. Now, on the other hand there is collectivism, “the idea that the individual’s life belongs not to him but to the group or society of which he is merely a part of has no rights, and that he must sacrifice his values and goals for the group’s greater good.” My take on this is “idea” is that you are completely controlled when put under this way of society. Having read the book Anthem by Ayn Rand collectivism is for sure something that I would not want to be a part of.

For the last century, individualism vs. collectivism has been a political conflict in America. What is collectivism and individualism you might ask, well collectivism is briefly defined as a group of people working together to give priority over individuals. On the other hand, individualism can be defined as a theory of favoring freedom over collective individuals and working to benefit his/her own self. Although the two seem very different, they also share many similar characteristics.

over the interest of the state or social group. Steven Lukes describes individualism as comprising

Looking at the chart the first dimension of culture plotted is individualism-collectivism. This dimension addresses how people define themselves and their relationships with others. Cultures that fall on the individualism side of the continuum share four characteristics. First, such cultures consider the individual to be the most important entity in any social setting. Second, individualistic cultures stress independence rather than dependence. Third, individualistic cultures reward individual achievement. The last characteristic is; individualistic cultures value each individual’s uniqueness.

This dimension is described by Hofstede (1980, 2001) as the framework where society decides if they are closely related to their group or if they are more individualistic. Does the individual come first? Or does the team? In more individualist countries, focus is on the individuals interest and needs, value is placed on the person specifically, individuals are awarded for their efforts (i.e. leaders take credit for

The Brave New World civilization’s ideology of the group being of greater importance than the individual prevails in many modern systems of

The United States and China aspire to command the world economy, but their lifestyle and standpoints look like east and west. When comparing the U.S. and China in Hofstede 6 dimensions model, there were four main dimensions that are strikingly distinctive. These dimensions include individualism, power distance, long-term orientation, and indulgence. Recognizing cultural differences is the first step towards understanding each other. The difference between the United States and China are pronounced, and they merit rigorous examination.

The term “behavior” refers one’s acts dominated by ideology in response to certain situations. Behavior derives from the long development of culture in which people are defined what is supposed to act based on the identity given. In other words, one’s behavior sometimes is the demonstration of one’s identity. Living in a multi-culture world, people from various cultures may behave totally different toward a situation or stimulus. Western and eastern cultures typically reflects the point of behavioral differentiations among distinct cultures. The United States, as a superpower established in last hundreds of years, possesses distinguishing features of western culture such as open and liberty. Meanwhile, China is an eastern country with an ancient civilization stands for conservative culture. Therefore, as represents of these two cultures, the United States and China are appropriate examples to explore the behavioral differentiations, and the differences in behavior can be well demonstrated through daily behaviors like classroom, driving and dining.

Dr. Geert Hofstede created the first four dimensions of culture in the 1970’s after analyzing statistical data from IBM over the course of many years. In the 1990’s he created the fifth dimension after noticing specific cultural differences in Asian countries and their ties to Confucian philosophy. (www.mindtools.com) The five dimensions are as follows: Power/Distance (PD), Individualism (IDV), Masculinity (MAS), Uncertainty/Avoidance Index (UAI), and Long Term Orientation (LTO). I will only discuss a few of these as they seem more prominent to this case. First, let’s talk about the Power/Distance (PD) dimension as it pertains to Ms. Myers in South Korea.

When a business decides to venture internationally into different countries with its products, services, and operations, it is very important that the company gains an understanding of how the culture of the different societies affects the values found in those societies. Geert Hofstede conducted one of the most famous and most used studies on how culture relates to values. Hofstede study enabled him to compare dimensions of culture across 40 countries. He originally isolated four dimensions of what he claimed summarized different cultures — power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism versus collectivism, and masculinity versus femininity (Hill, 2013, p.110). To cover aspects of values not discussed in the original paradigm Hofstede has since added two more dimensions — Confucianism or long-term orientation and indulgence versus self-restraint (Hofstede, n.d.). Because of the way Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are given an index score from 0-100, it is easy for a company to get a general comparison between the cultures they are expanding into and the culture they are already in.

The advent of social networking and other media has transformed the way citizens interact and how businesses market, promote, and distribute their products globally. The same can be said for mass collaboration efforts occurring through digital, online technology for the development of new and innovative systems, products, and ideas. Both social networking and mass collaboration bring new power and influence to individuals across borders and transform the nature of their relationships with global organizations. As in the past, these developments underscore and reinforce the importance of understanding different cultures, national systems, and corporate management practices around the world. Students and managers now recognize that all business is global and that the world is now interconnected not only geographically but also electronically and psychologically; it is hard to imagine any business or nonbusiness organization that is not directly affected by globalization. Yet, as cultural, political, and economic differences persist, savvy international managers must be able to develop a global mindset in order to effectively adjust, adapt, and navigate the changing landscape they face on a day-to-day basis. In this new eighth edition of International Management, we have taken care to retain the

First, Individualism vs. Collectivism. Individualism is the social function of the relative likelihood of a free and individual means only take care of themselves and their families. By contrast, collectivism is the tendency of social functions relatively tight where each individual to identify themselves as a group with loyalty not need to be asked. The main problem of this dimension is the degree of interdependence of individuals in a