FAMAGUSTA, Inc. (a fictitious name) is a large, non-US-based multinational corporation (MNC) that has set up its new office in Manila. With the help of a few previous connections and more than a little good fortune, you land your first contract within a relatively short period of time. The job involves providing professional consultation and technical support on a joint ven- ture project with a local corporation. You will be working in the offices of the Philippine company, scoping and designing the project, managing the implementation phase, and working with their domestic personnel to get the job done. Your contract specifies an interim review after the design phase is International Business completed, but top management assures you that it is just a formality—they definitely want to work with you for the whole project. You review the facilities and résumés of both management and technical staff and every- thing looks fine. No problem, you tell yourself as you tackle the project enthusiastically. At first everything is great. You are given your own office and are told by the chief executive officer (CEO) to work directly with the executive vice president (EVP) for the division; he seems highly supportive and tells you to call on him at any time for whatever you might need. Although the working environment is relaxed by American and European standards, the staff works long hours and everyone is unfailingly polite. You soon find yourself enjoying the change of pace and the congenial aspects of the Filipino workplace. Until, that is, you become aware that the project is slowly but surely falling behind schedule. Being the accountable party, you know it is up to you to address the problem. After some quiet background investigation, you pinpoint the source of the problem: the manager of a mission-critical department who appears to be horrendously incompetent. An old lady near- ing retirement by the name of Mrs. Santos has been with the company her entire career. The analysis shows clearly that the problem lies in her use of outdated methods and her resistance to certain innovative aspects of the project. Although your interactions with her have always been courteous, you begin to wonder if she’s trying to sabotage your efforts. In an effort to attack the problem you approach the EVP to discuss the issue. You come in well prepared for the meeting, with hard copy docu- mentation tracing the bottleneck to Mrs. Santos’s inept management. Thus, you are a bit surprised that he doesn’t seem to share your concern for the issue. Although he listens intently to what you have to say, he gives oblique answers to your questions and seems to be avoiding the issue. But you know better than to press too hard and quickly back off. At the end of the meet- ing, which was much shorter than you anticipated, it is clear that he thinks you can work around Mrs. Santos and that he does not share your concern about the problem. You do your best to keep the project on track, and keep looking the other way. However, the problems continue to pile up and get even worse over the next few weeks. Murphy seems to lurk around every corner, and every time you have to put out a fire the origin seems to lie in the same place: the inefficient department head. You have lunch with a couple of her key employees and pump them for information. Although what they tell you about operational matters confirms what you already know about inefficiency, it also becomes clear that they see no way of changing dear old Mrs. Santos’s way of doing things. When asked hard questions about project objectives and what could be done to ease the bottlenecks, they shrug their shoulders and laugh in a nervous, almost incongruous fashion. Finally, at a key staff meeting just before you must file your interim report, the issue comes to a head. The EVP is there, but primarily as an observer—as the big shot expat consultant, you are chairing the meeting. You present the project as it has proceeded to date, doing your best to paint a positive picture, even going out of your way to compliment some of the technical staff who have done outstanding jobs. But you feel that you can no longer avoid the hard fact that important deadlines are about to be missed. It also seems clear to you that 90 percent of the problems lie in that one particular department. When Mrs. Santos takes the floor to summarize her department’s work on the project, however, she paints a glowing picture. Things are really moving along, targets are being met and exceeded, everything is copacetic indeed. You can’t believe what you are hearing! You know that everyone in the room must know that she is basically covering up, and can’t help being upset in that she is downright contradicting what you have been saying and trying to bring to everyone’s attention. Responding to your gut instincts and knowing for a fact that the data support your position, you take a deep breath before asking a series of hard questions that leave Mrs. Santos with very little wriggle room. She gives evasive answers, and everyone else around the table suddenly becomes quite uncomfortable. People are shifting around in their chairs and looking out of the windows—a drastic shift in mood. You immediately realize that you have made a major blunder, but it’s too late to back off, so you press ahead. After her third circular and evasive answer, the EVP clears his throat rather loudly, then interrupts: “Perhaps we should move on with the meeting. These little details can be worked out later.” Within a month the project has fallen completely off track, precisely as you would have predicted. However, rather than taking action to put things back on track, top management decides to rethink the whole project, including their collaboration with the outside consultant (that being you). At the recommendation of the EVP, they pull the plug entirely after the design phase. They thank you for doing such a good job on the project design, reassure you they are anxious to work with you in the future, and cancel the project as it was their contractual prerogative to do. In parting, the EVP tells you: “Our staff feels that they can really carry this out on our own, and management agrees. Your work has been first-rate, but you know things can change. Call me if you ever need a reference.” Note: The case is strategically placed in this chapter for the simple reason of sensitizing and exposing the readers very early on to international business with the cultural perspective in mind. More in-depth discussion on culture will take place in Chapter 2. Question: What do you think really happened in this case? What is Mrs. Santos’s position in the company? What issues of international busi- ness are found in this case? What do you think the consultant should have done?
FAMAGUSTA, Inc. (a fictitious name) is a large, non-US-based multinational corporation (MNC) that has set up its new office in Manila. With the help of a few previous connections and more than a little good fortune, you land your first contract within a relatively short period of time. The job involves providing professional consultation and technical support on a joint ven- ture project with a local corporation. You will be working in the offices of the Philippine company, scoping and designing the project, managing the implementation phase, and working with their domestic personnel to get the job done. Your contract specifies an interim review after the design phase is International Business completed, but top management assures you that it is just a formality—they definitely want to work with you for the whole project. You review the facilities and résumés of both management and technical staff and every- thing looks fine. No problem, you tell yourself as you tackle the project enthusiastically. At first everything is great. You are given your own office and are told by the chief executive officer (CEO) to work directly with the executive vice president (EVP) for the division; he seems highly supportive and tells you to call on him at any time for whatever you might need. Although the working environment is relaxed by American and European standards, the staff works long hours and everyone is unfailingly polite. You soon find yourself enjoying the change of pace and the congenial aspects of the Filipino workplace. Until, that is, you become aware that the project is slowly but surely falling behind schedule. Being the accountable party, you know it is up to you to address the problem. After some quiet background investigation, you pinpoint the source of the problem: the manager of a mission-critical department who appears to be horrendously incompetent. An old lady near- ing retirement by the name of Mrs. Santos has been with the company her entire career. The analysis shows clearly that the problem lies in her use of outdated methods and her resistance to certain innovative aspects of the project. Although your interactions with her have always been courteous, you begin to wonder if she’s trying to sabotage your efforts. In an effort to attack the problem you approach the EVP to discuss the issue. You come in well prepared for the meeting, with hard copy docu- mentation tracing the bottleneck to Mrs. Santos’s inept management. Thus, you are a bit surprised that he doesn’t seem to share your concern for the issue. Although he listens intently to what you have to say, he gives oblique answers to your questions and seems to be avoiding the issue. But you know better than to press too hard and quickly back off. At the end of the meet- ing, which was much shorter than you anticipated, it is clear that he thinks you can work around Mrs. Santos and that he does not share your concern about the problem. You do your best to keep the project on track, and keep looking the other way. However, the problems continue to pile up and get even worse over the next few weeks. Murphy seems to lurk around every corner, and every time you have to put out a fire the origin seems to lie in the same place: the inefficient department head. You have lunch with a couple of her key employees and pump them for information. Although what they tell you about operational matters confirms what you already know about inefficiency, it also becomes clear that they see no way of changing dear old Mrs. Santos’s way of doing things. When asked hard questions about project objectives and what could be done to ease the bottlenecks, they shrug their shoulders and laugh in a nervous, almost incongruous fashion. Finally, at a key staff meeting just before you must file your interim report, the issue comes to a head. The EVP is there, but primarily as an observer—as the big shot expat consultant, you are chairing the meeting. You present the project as it has proceeded to date, doing your best to paint a positive picture, even going out of your way to compliment some of the technical staff who have done outstanding jobs. But you feel that you can no longer avoid the hard fact that important deadlines are about to be missed. It also seems clear to you that 90 percent of the problems lie in that one particular department. When Mrs. Santos takes the floor to summarize her department’s work on the project, however, she paints a glowing picture. Things are really moving along, targets are being met and exceeded, everything is copacetic indeed. You can’t believe what you are hearing! You know that everyone in the room must know that she is basically covering up, and can’t help being upset in that she is downright contradicting what you have been saying and trying to bring to everyone’s attention. Responding to your gut instincts and knowing for a fact that the data support your position, you take a deep breath before asking a series of hard questions that leave Mrs. Santos with very little wriggle room. She gives evasive answers, and everyone else around the table suddenly becomes quite uncomfortable. People are shifting around in their chairs and looking out of the windows—a drastic shift in mood. You immediately realize that you have made a major blunder, but it’s too late to back off, so you press ahead. After her third circular and evasive answer, the EVP clears his throat rather loudly, then interrupts: “Perhaps we should move on with the meeting. These little details can be worked out later.” Within a month the project has fallen completely off track, precisely as you would have predicted. However, rather than taking action to put things back on track, top management decides to rethink the whole project, including their collaboration with the outside consultant (that being you). At the recommendation of the EVP, they pull the plug entirely after the design phase. They thank you for doing such a good job on the project design, reassure you they are anxious to work with you in the future, and cancel the project as it was their contractual prerogative to do. In parting, the EVP tells you: “Our staff feels that they can really carry this out on our own, and management agrees. Your work has been first-rate, but you know things can change. Call me if you ever need a reference.” Note: The case is strategically placed in this chapter for the simple reason of sensitizing and exposing the readers very early on to international business with the cultural perspective in mind. More in-depth discussion on culture will take place in Chapter 2. Question: What do you think really happened in this case? What is Mrs. Santos’s position in the company? What issues of international busi- ness are found in this case? What do you think the consultant should have done?
Chapter1: Taking Risks And Making Profits Within The Dynamic Business Environment
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1CE
Related questions
Question
FAMAGUSTA, Inc. (a fictitious name) is a large, non-US-based multinational
corporation (MNC) that has set up its new office in Manila. With the help
of a few previous connections and more than a little good fortune, you land
your first contract within a relatively short period of time. The job involves
providing professional consultation and technical support on a joint ven-
ture project with a local corporation. You will be working in the offices of
the Philippine company, scoping and designing the project, managing the
implementation phase, and working with their domestic personnel to get the
job done. Your contract specifies an interim review after the design phase is
International Business
completed, but top management assures you that it is just a formality—they
definitely want to work with you for the whole project. You review the
facilities and résumés of both management and technical staff and every-
thing looks fine. No problem, you tell yourself as you tackle the project
enthusiastically.
At first everything is great. You are given your own office and are told
by the chief executive officer (CEO) to work directly with the executive
vice president (EVP) for the division; he seems highly supportive and tells
you to call on him at any time for whatever you might need. Although the
working environment is relaxed by American and European standards, the
staff works long hours and everyone is unfailingly polite. You soon find
yourself enjoying the change of pace and the congenial aspects of the Filipino
workplace.
Until, that is, you become aware that the project is slowly but surely
falling behind schedule. Being the accountable party, you know it is up to
you to address the problem. After some quiet background investigation,
you pinpoint the source of the problem: the manager of a mission-critical
department who appears to be horrendously incompetent. An old lady near-
ing retirement by the name of Mrs. Santos has been with the company her
entire career. The analysis shows clearly that the problem lies in her use
of outdated methods and her resistance to certain innovative aspects of the
project. Although your interactions with her have always been courteous,
you begin to wonder if she’s trying to sabotage your efforts.
In an effort to attack the problem you approach the EVP to discuss the
issue. You come in well prepared for the meeting, with hard copy docu-
mentation tracing the bottleneck to Mrs. Santos’s inept management. Thus,
you are a bit surprised that he doesn’t seem to share your concern for the
issue. Although he listens intently to what you have to say, he gives oblique
answers to your questions and seems to be avoiding the issue. But you know
better than to press too hard and quickly back off. At the end of the meet-
ing, which was much shorter than you anticipated, it is clear that he thinks
you can work around Mrs. Santos and that he does not share your concern
about the problem.
You do your best to keep the project on track, and keep looking the
other way. However, the problems continue to pile up and get even worse
over the next few weeks. Murphy seems to lurk around every corner, and
every time you have to put out a fire the origin seems to lie in the same
place: the inefficient department head. You have lunch with a couple of
her key employees and pump them for information. Although what they
tell you about operational matters confirms what you already know about
inefficiency, it also becomes clear that they see no way of changing dear old
Mrs. Santos’s way of doing things. When asked hard questions about project objectives and what could be done to ease the bottlenecks, they shrug their
shoulders and laugh in a nervous, almost incongruous fashion.
Finally, at a key staff meeting just before you must file your interim
report, the issue comes to a head. The EVP is there, but primarily as an
observer—as the big shot expat consultant, you are chairing the meeting.
You present the project as it has proceeded to date, doing your best to paint
a positive picture, even going out of your way to compliment some of the
technical staff who have done outstanding jobs. But you feel that you can no
longer avoid the hard fact that important deadlines are about to be missed.
It also seems clear to you that 90 percent of the problems lie in that one
particular department.
When Mrs. Santos takes the floor to summarize her department’s work
on the project, however, she paints a glowing picture. Things are really
moving along, targets are being met and exceeded, everything is copacetic
indeed. You can’t believe what you are hearing! You know that everyone in
the room must know that she is basically covering up, and can’t help being
upset in that she is downright contradicting what you have been saying and
trying to bring to everyone’s attention.
Responding to your gut instincts and knowing for a fact that the data
support your position, you take a deep breath before asking a series of hard
questions that leave Mrs. Santos with very little wriggle room. She gives
evasive answers, and everyone else around the table suddenly becomes quite
uncomfortable. People are shifting around in their chairs and looking out
of the windows—a drastic shift in mood. You immediately realize that you
have made a major blunder, but it’s too late to back off, so you press ahead.
After her third circular and evasive answer, the EVP clears his throat rather
loudly, then interrupts: “Perhaps we should move on with the meeting. These
little details can be worked out later.”
Within a month the project has fallen completely off track, precisely
as you would have predicted. However, rather than taking action to put
things back on track, top management decides to rethink the whole project,
including their collaboration with the outside consultant (that being you). At
the recommendation of the EVP, they pull the plug entirely after the design
phase. They thank you for doing such a good job on the project design,
reassure you they are anxious to work with you in the future, and cancel
the project as it was their contractual prerogative to do. In parting, the EVP
tells you: “Our staff feels that they can really carry this out on our own, and
management agrees. Your work has been first-rate, but you know things can
change. Call me if you ever need a reference.”
Note: The case is strategically placed in this chapter for the simple reason of
sensitizing and exposing the readers very early on to international business
with the cultural perspective in mind. More in-depth discussion on culture will take place in Chapter 2.
Question: What do you think really happened in this case? What is
Mrs. Santos’s position in the company? What issues of international busi-
ness are found in this case? What do you think the consultant should have done?
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
Knowledge Booster
Learn more about
Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, management and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.Recommended textbooks for you
Understanding Business
Management
ISBN:
9781259929434
Author:
William Nickels
Publisher:
McGraw-Hill Education
Management (14th Edition)
Management
ISBN:
9780134527604
Author:
Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. Coulter
Publisher:
PEARSON
Spreadsheet Modeling & Decision Analysis: A Pract…
Management
ISBN:
9781305947412
Author:
Cliff Ragsdale
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Understanding Business
Management
ISBN:
9781259929434
Author:
William Nickels
Publisher:
McGraw-Hill Education
Management (14th Edition)
Management
ISBN:
9780134527604
Author:
Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. Coulter
Publisher:
PEARSON
Spreadsheet Modeling & Decision Analysis: A Pract…
Management
ISBN:
9781305947412
Author:
Cliff Ragsdale
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Management Information Systems: Managing The Digi…
Management
ISBN:
9780135191798
Author:
Kenneth C. Laudon, Jane P. Laudon
Publisher:
PEARSON
Business Essentials (12th Edition) (What's New in…
Management
ISBN:
9780134728391
Author:
Ronald J. Ebert, Ricky W. Griffin
Publisher:
PEARSON
Fundamentals of Management (10th Edition)
Management
ISBN:
9780134237473
Author:
Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. Coulter, David A. De Cenzo
Publisher:
PEARSON