Management Styles in Different Cultures Comparing Eastern and Western Styles

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS 3

1. INTRODUCTION 4

2. MANAGEMENT STYLE FUNDAMENTALS 5

3. WESTERN MANAGEMENT STYLE (USA) 6

4. EASTERN MANAGEMENT STYLE (CHINA) 7

5. COMPARISON BETWEEN STYLES 8

6. CONCLUSION 10

REFERENCES 11

APPENDIX 13

1. Introduction

Different people work in different companies that are located in different countries that have different ways of thinking, managing, operating, and implementing the jobs at hand, be it in small firms or in huge corporations. "Management" is a word that sometimes when you are in it, one tends to overlook that it exists at all. But facts are that not only it exists, but it does in different systems and styles.

And the common thing between all management systems and styles is the framework of processes and procedures used to ensure that an organization can fulfill all tasks required to achieve its objectives.

But here is where the road diverges since the style of management that is used in an organization has such a major effect on the creativity and innovation, efficiency and performance, and the most important one, which is outcome and profit.

Usually the style of managing an organization in a particular country is affected by how the major organization "i.e. the government" in that country is run. Also you can find that the management is effected by the culture, religion, habits and norms.

In short, the management style chosen is the key aspect of making decisions and relating to subordinates. This idea was further developed by Robert Tannenbaum and Warren H. Schmidt (1958, 1973), who argued that the style chosen and the type of leadership implemented is dependent upon the existing circumstances. Therefore leaders or managers should be flexible and ready to exercise a range of management styles to ensure the maximization of efficiency, productivity, and outcome.

So with all that said imagine that earth is like your brain divided into a left hemisphere which resembles the east and a right hemisphere which resembles the west, where each one functions in a totally different way than the other.

But as in the real world people tend to use one side of the brain more than the other and this is what results in the way the person turns out to be.

So what side of your brain do you think functions better; the east "i.e. CHINA" or the west "i.e. USA"?

2. Management style fundamentals

Different management styles are result of national cultural heritage. Studies of comparative management demonstrate evidence the Chinese manage their firms quite differently from the Americans. Therefore national culture might be a reason for the diverse styles of organizing and managing firms(Reihlen, 2001). For instance, foundation of an autocratic style of management came from a country that is run by a king or dictator. Therefore autocrats often manage the labor in an aggressive and dominating way. Managers do not trust workers and simply give orders that they expect to be obeyed (McGregor, 1960). The communication involved with this method is mainly downward, from the leader to the subordinate (Davidmann, 2006). Autocratic management style allows the person to make final decisions about the business without consulting with the team members.

Paternalistic management may sound the same as the autocratic style. But this type of management style is when managers give more attention to the social needs of their workers. A manager is expected to make the final decision but not without careful consideration of the feedback employees. The business leaders usually appear authoritative in control. However this desire for managers to be authoritative should not be confused with a desire for managers to be authoritarian (Levi, 2010).

The Democratic management style is the style grafted from the government system of the United States. Now the employees are encouraged to take a larger role in decision making, than what was previously described. Leaders like this give the chances for team members to propose suggestions. An important feature of participative management style has been two-way communication(Kulkarni).

The Laissez-faire type of management would be extremely bad choice in some cases. By definition it refuses to interfere. A Laissez faire manager sets the tasks and gives staff complete freedom to complete the task as they see fit. There is minimal involvement from the manager. It works mainly for people that are self-motivated and task oriented.

3. Western management style (USA)

For Western firms, leadership style is both supportive and participative towards the workforce with transformational leadership, dogmatism, a locus of control, and intolerance of ambiguity (Wilmar, 1978).

Over the last four decades, ideas about western management styles have been dominated by the American management model (Reihlen, 2001)

American management style has been characterized as focusing on communication by interaction in addition to emphasizing procedure and being process-oriented (Clarke, 1998). Employees are more willing to share their opinions as it allows them to participate in the organization and have a greater discretion. Although important decisions might be discussed in open forum, the ultimate responsibility for the consequences of decisions lies with the boss.(http://www.worldbusinessculture.com/)

What concerns time efficiency. "Time is money"- it is not just managers' mantra, since they like to have results as soon as they can. Time is one measure of efficiency. Therefore, much emphasis is placed on meeting schedules. Punctuality is very important for business occasions. Time consciousness leads to a focus on short-term goals, usually money-oriented or transactions-oriented. Money is key priority for Americans.

According to Gerard Hendrik Hofstede assessment of cultural difference Western management style can be described as individualistic in approach. Individualists emphasize personal achievement at the expense of group goals, resulting in a strong sense of competition. As managers gain influence, they end up wanting more. They go to great lengths to protect and extend their range of control, sometimes to the detriment of the business or industry they