Ñòðàíèöà: 7/13
As a culture, they are goal-oriented. They want to get the work done in the most efficient manner, and they assume that everyone else does too. They think they are improving things if they can figure out a way for two people using modern methods to do the same work as four people using the "old way." But in countries like India and Pakistan, where unemployment is extremely high, creating jobs is more important than getting the work done efficiently. Executives in these countries would rather employ four workers than two.
Roles and status
Culture dictates the roles people play, including who communicates with whom, what they communicate, and in what way. In many countries, for example, women still do not play a very prominent role in business. As a result, female executives from American firms may find themselves sent off to eat in a separate room with the wives of Arab businessmen, while the men all eat dinner together.
Concepts of status also differ, and as a consequence, people establish their credibility in different ways. North Americans, for example, send status signals that reflect materialistic values. The big boss has the corner office on the top floor, deep carpets, an expensive desk, and handsome accessories. The most successful companies are located in the most prestigious buildings. In other countries, status is communicated in other ways. For example, the highest-ranking executives in France sit in the middle of an open area, surrounded by lower-level employees. In the Middle East, fine possessions are reserved for the home, and business is conducted in cramped and modest quarters. An American executive who assumes that these office arrangements indicate a lack of status is making a big mistake.
Decision-making customs
In North America, they try to reach decisions as quickly and efficiently as possible. The top people focus on reaching agreement on the main points and leave the details to be worked out later by others. In Greece, this approach would backfire. A Greek executive assumes that anyone who ignores the details is being evasive and untrustworthy. Spending time on every little point is considered a mark of good faith. Similarly, Latin Americans prefer to make their deals slowly, after a lengthy period of discussion. They resist an authoritarian "Here's the deal, take it or leave it" approach, preferring the more sociable method of an extended discussion.
Cultures also differ in terms of who makes the decisions. In american culture, many organisations are dominated by a single figure who says yes or no to every deal. It is the same in Pakistan, where you can get a decision quickly if you reach the highest-ranking executive. In other cultures, notably China and Japan, decision making is a shared responsibility. No individual has the authority to commit the organisation without first consulting others. In Japan, for example, the negotiating team arrives at a consensus through an elaborate, time-consuming process (agreement must be complete — there is no majority rule). If the process is not laborious enough, the Japanese feel uncomfortable.
Concepts of time
Differing perceptions of time are another factor that can lead to misunderstandings. An executive from North America or Germany attaches one meaning to time; an executive from Latin America, Ethiopia, or Japan attaches another. Let's say that a salesperson from Chicago calls on a client in Mexico City. After spending 30 minutes in the outer office, the person from Chicago feels angry and insulted, assuming, "This client must attach a very low priority to my visit to keep me waiting half an hour." In fact, the Mexican client does not mean to imply anything at all by this delay. To the Mexican, a wait of 30 minutes is a matter of course.
Or let's say that a New Yorker is trying to negotiate a deal in Ethiopia. This is an important deal, and the New Yorker assumes that the Ethiopians will give the matter top priority and reach a decision quickly. Not so. In Ethiopia, important deals take a long, long time. After all, if a deal is important, it should be given much careful thought, shouldn't it?
Ðåôåðàò îïóáëèêîâàí: 20/02/2007