Tesi - uno studio interculturale: Aspettative degli studenti e criteri decisionali relativi al contesto di lavoro internazionale

CROSS-CULTURAL DIMENSIONS OF DECISION MAKING

The day-by-day decision-making process of international managers is very complex when the working environment includes individuals with different points of view and perspectives. The majority of the choices is made automatically according to cultural scripts that managers present for every situation.

Following a rational decision making, the managerial choice is sorted into – “optimization model”) prescriptive approaches (what they should do) and descriptive approaches (what they actually do). Nevertheless, due to the limits to rationality (Simon 1955) caused by cultural constraints and incomplete information, it is not always possible making rational decisions and managers prefer relying on heuristics (e.g. rules of thumb, cognitive tools) to develop decision making. In addition

To heuristics and cognitive simplification, the decision-making process is also shaped by other elements such as motivational biases influenced by self-interests and cultural values. Two managerial decision-making processes that are significant in terms of cross-cultural interactions are the "selection of personnel" and the "reward allocation". For example, in a survey concerning the selection of employees in twenty countries, similarities and differences in the selection process were found. In table 6 we can see such similarities and differences among the target countries (except for the Scandinavian region, since only Sweden has been involved in the research). The table is about the processes and techniques that companies used to select possible employees and is developed on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = never to 5 = always.

As we can see from the table, selection and staffing strategies differ by nation. One of the most important results of this study showed that cultural dimensions can heuristics that simplify the decision-making process are availability (the extent to which events are reminded).

Representativeness (how similar a circumstance is to the mental script of similar experiences), anchoring and adjustment (adaptation of an initial judgment to a final decision)82 Ryan, McFarland, Baron (1999). An international look at selection practices: Nation and culture as explanations of variability in practice. Personnel psychology, Vol. 52(2). Pp. 359-39159 explain part of the variability in such practices. For example, cultures high in uncertainty avoidance make an extensive use of structured questionnaires and test types, they rely more on interviews and control extensively their processes. On the other hand, they use less typologies of selection and staffing methods. Nevertheless, the use of structured interviews or fixed sets of interview based on the “technology lag” questions is also and the fact that some cultures may perceive structured questions antithetical to beliefs about how one should trust the sentences of the interviewer or how to attend an interpersonal.

interaction (Ryan, McFarland, Baron, 1999). Again, in another study concerning eight European countries, 80 percent of the recruitment ads in the Scandinavian region highlighted the requirement of interpersonal skills, whereas in the United Kingdom and in Germany was about 65 percent and in Italy and Spain only 50 percent (these countries preferred emphasizing the requirement of a certain age due to the higher power distance).

Another important decision-making process is that related to the allocation of rewards. Recent studies showed that the dimension of power distance may best predict differences in the allocation of rewards across diverse cultures.

Some significant reward allocation criteria are equality, equity, need and seniority, which are associated with cultural differences. For example, hierarchical (high level of power distance) and individualist cultures prefer equity over equality in the allocation of rewards, whereas collectivist countries perceive fairness as the result.

is received by the receiver but also that the meaning is transmitted. Cross-cultural communication is often more challenging than interacting in a specific culture because of the lack of common grounding. In an international working context (diversity workforce, international teams), it is therefore important for both workers and managers to create a climate of mutual understanding and knowledge of the others.

The principal elements of cross-cultural communication are the language and the communication styles. The first element is determined by direct or indirect expressions such as the use of pray, slang and jargon, proverbs and maxims, idioms and euphemism, whereas the latter is characterized by extremely important aspects that depend on which context the communication is taking place.

For example, in a low context culture people are expected to say perfectly what they mean since the communication is supposed to be direct, explicit and unambiguous (explicit versus implicit; direct versus

Another significant difference is also determined by the "silence and verbal overkill", e.g. how silence is used and how cultures value it (Giles, Coupland & Wiemann, 1992). For example, silence may be a representation of a high-context communication (Graham, 1985), whereas Western countries perceive it as a form of misunderstanding.

Other nonverbal-communication considerations are determined by other elements such as the tone of voice, proxemics, body gestures, as well as facial expressions and eye contact. Even the meaning of colours is not unique across cultures.

While a foreigner can learn a language without difficulty thanks to courses and training, the set of interactions made up of gestures, symbols, perception of time and space is often perceived as common to all cultures and, therefore, it is not considered.

Therefore, for a correct cross-cultural management, it is necessary to create a climate in which foreign workers understand that they are

accepted and do not feel discriminated. Speaking and listening is crucial to understand the level of knowledge of the culture learned from the foreigners and therefore their level of acculturation. Moreover, creating socialization opportunities can help the migrants to understand cultural aspects, feel involved in the working context and accepted by their colleagues. 86 Hall Edward T., (1976). Beyond cultures. New York: Doubleday 611.

3.4 MOTIVATION ACROSS CULTURES

Student mobility, as migration, also focuses on different themes such as those concerning exchange, reciprocity, and integration. It demonstrates that each culture is intercultural and is characterized by the coexistence of common foundations defined by different expressions. Student mobility, in the scenario of people's migration, is particularly interesting, as it is governed by multiple environmental variables and personal motivations that amplify the meaning of travelling.

Although national and individual cultures differ from

each other, they present several principles in common as mechanisms by which societies survive over time. Such foundations are also reflected in organizational cultures and are features that prove to be vital to all organizations. One of the most important mechanism is motivation. Motivation can be divided into two aspects: a positive aspect which aims to attract and a negative one which aims to repulse. Motivating and leading groups is a difficult task that international managers have to face when working in an international context. Several theories of individual motivation have been developed during the last decades but they still have limited compatibility across cultures.

As Cartwright (1999) states, there exist nine key motivating factors that present a significant psychological aspect of motivation in the working context and may help as model for the measurement of motivation. Such factors are determined by:

• Identification: it motivates through influence on others or by

others;

• Equity: it is an equilibrium between expectations and actions;
• Equality: it regulates whether a relationship may be defined equitable or not;
• Consensus: it is mutual understanding;
• Instrumentality: force that drives actions to achieve or avoid particular results;
• Rationality: it is a methodical approach to problem solving;
• Development: it is the motivation for self-improvement;
• Inter-group versus Intra-group dynamics: it creates loyalty and mutual sharing;
• Internalization: of values and beliefs through the perceived integrity.

The motivational impact of a culture depends on the degree to which individuals have internalized/believed its traditions, teachings and values and adapt themselves to their practices and customs. In the working context, the development of work aspects and management practices is consistent with the different motivation of the workers.