DIALOGUE AND UNIVERSAUSMNo. 5-6/2006

Anna Murdoch

DIVERSITY AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF CULTURESAS PRINCIPLES OF UNIVERSAL CIVILIZATION

Paper prepared for and delivered (in the Power Point format)at the Fourth European Dialogue and Universalism Congress

Warsaw University, Warsaw, July 23-30, 2005

Enrichissez-vous de vos differences^

ABSTRACT

Hofstede's cultural values framework has been applied in a study looking at possiblerelations between migration streams and their country of destinations. The study isbased on a model which consists of three factors: Human Resources Management, Cul-ture Dimensions and Migration and it points out their non-linear relationship. Migrationoutflows from Poland in 2002 are measured against culture dimensions (both in Polandand destinations countries) and power distance emerges as the most influential possible"pull" factor. A list of positive and negative implications of the Human Resources Man-agement, Migration and Culture Dimensions relationship on a personal, corporate andnational level is presented.

Key words: cross-cultural management; migration; culture dimensions; power dis-tance; human potential; human resources.

' I would like to thank my students form the Students' Scientific Association of Cross-CulturalManagement: Jacek Hutyra, Malgorzata Boska and Katarzyna Giereto for their input, and particu-larly Jacek Hutyra for his contribution in the calculations and table design.

118 Anna Murdoch

Globalization" has opened new avenues and increased the pool of opportuni-ties for Human Potential.

Labour force has been enjoying those opportunities, i.e., accessing work andgaining employment outside their country of origin through traditional options,such as migration. Those opportunities have presented themselves also throughdifferent forms of expatriate assignments in multinational companies whichhave been spreading around the globe particularly robustly since the 1980s.Intemational employment opportunities have been generated also by the net ofsupranational institutions (such as the EU offices) and finally through smallercompanies, often operating with the help of virtual offtces around the globe.

This paper looks at some aspects of culture (as identified by Hofstede, 1980and 2000), in particular a culture dimension called Power Distance which couldbe one of the factors influencing decisions about inigration (and consequentlyemployment decisions).

In order to analyze this hypothesis more closely it is necessary to list thesources and authors who introduced and/or defmed the most important conceptsused in this paper.

The work of Geert Hofstede (1980) is the source of the ideas, definitions andmeasures of indices for culture dimensions: power distance, masculinity, indi-vidualism, uncertainty avoidance. The concepts of cross-cultural managementcome from the following sources: Christopher Bartlett and Sumantra Ghoshal(1992), Harry Triandis (1981), Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Tumer(1998) as well as the contribution of the author herself (Murdoch 1999). Theconcepts of sustainable national competitive advantage come from the work ofMichael Porter (1990). The works of Raymond Noe et al (2000) and David D.Baron et al (1999), are, respectively, the principal fundaments on which theHuman Resources component of the model presented in this paper rests.

DEFINING THE CONCEPTS

Before the conceptual bases for the model and hypothesis are introduced it isnecessary to include several definitions for clarity purposes.

^ The author proposes the following definition of globalization (which she compiled herselfdrawing from eclectic sources which are based primarily on the economic sciences), for the pur-pose of establishing a common framework of the concept in this paper;

— planning, operating, distributing and selling on the national as well as well intemationalmarkets, taking into consideration the interrelatedness of the factors involved in those processes;

— an unstoppable flow of the resources (both physical and human as well as information)across borders;

— uniformity of tastes, wants and desires across the globe thanks to technological advancesand the standardization and centralization processes within the modem media and their deriva-tives, which facilitates the homogeneity of lifestyles.

Diversity and Complementarity of Cultures as Principles of Universal Civiliziition 119

Competences are cotnbinations of resources (human, financial, physical,technological, legal, information) and capabilities (industry-specific skills, rela-tionships, organisational knowledge) (Stonehouse et al, 2000).

Cross-cultural competences are competences that are core for operating ina cross-cultural environment, i.e., those which differ in four areas—cultural,administrative, geographical and economic (as specified by Ghemawat,2001).

Human Potential is the poo! of all present and future individuals, with alltheir knowledge, skills and experience, who might create added value (an eclec-tic definition).

Human Capital is the productive capabilities of individuals that is theknowledge, skills and experience that have economic value (an eclectic defmi-tion).

Human Resource Management is the policies, practices, and systems thatinfluence employees' behaviour, attitudes, and performances (Noe et at).

Migration is the process of moving from one region or country to live orsettle in another (a dictionary definition).

Push factors are a cluster of objective and subjective reasons encouraging toemigrate from the home country (e.g., political persecution, a high rate of un-employment in the home country, low GDP per capita, a perceived lack of self-fulfilment opportunities) (Korys 2003).

Pull factors are a set of objective and subjective reasons encouraging toimmigrate to a given country (perceived increased opportunities to increaseone's standard of living because the country of destination has a high GDP percapita, or the migrant has hopes to educate better oneself or one's childrenand/or other reasons) (Korys 2003).

The above concepts are fundamental in establishing the migration and Hu-man Resources components of the model that the author introduces later as agraphic representation of the HRM/Culture/Migration relation.

HOFSTEDE'S CULTURE DIMENSIONS

The third component of the model are the cultural dimensions, as investi-gated and described in-depth by Geert Hofstede (1980). The author has decidedto use this particular model for the purpose of the exercise described in thisarticle intentionally, since it offers quantified values for cultures. Four out of thefive dimensions (long term prospective is not taken into account), i.e., powerdistance, individualism (collectivism), masculinity (femininity) and uncertaintyavoidance are applied in this paper. The author has decided to disregard fre-quent criticisms that have surrounded Hofstede's model since its conception.

Power Distance (PDI) focuses on the degree of equality, or inequality, be-tween people in the country's society.

120 Anna Murdoch

Low power distance

• Subordinates expect to be consulted• Teachers expect initiatives from students in class• Inequalities between people should be minimized

High power distance

• Subordinates expect to be told what to do• Privileges and status symbols are expected• Teachers are expected to take all initiatives in class' Inequalities between people are expected and desired

The source for al! the culture dimensions as well as diagrams below has been(as available on-line 2005): http://www.geert-hofstede.com. The data from thesite has been accessed, selected for specific countries (the choice being morecommon sense and arbitrary then based on a cluster of specific criteria) andprocessed in the form of the tables below to illustrate differences rather thansimilarities.

Individualism (IDV) focuses on the degree the society reinforces individualor collective achievement and interpersonal relationships.

Individualism

• Identity is based on the individual - .• Work relationship is seen as contract based on mutual advantage• Employment decisions supposed to be based on skills and rules• Low-context communication (communication delivered mainly through

words)

Collectivism

• Identity is based on one's social network• Work relationship is seen in moral terms, like family links• Employment decisions reflect a person's group connections• High-context communication (a lot of importance comes from paralinguis-

tic (non-verbal) components, e.g., gestures

Masculinity (MAS) focuses on the degree the society reinforces, or does notreinforce, the traditional masculine work role model of male achievement, con-trol, and power.

Masculinity

• Distinct gender roles• Assertiveness

Diversity and Complementarity of Cultures as Principles df Universal Civilization 121

• Focus on equity, competition, and performance• Managers are expected to be decisive and assertive

Femininity

• Gender roles overlap• Focus on equality, solidarity, and quality of work life• Managers use intuition and strive for consensus• Humility and modesty are important

Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI) focuses on the level of tolerance for uncer-tainty and ambiguity within the society, i.e., unstructured situations.

Low uncertainty avoidance

• Few rules• High tolerance of novel/unorthodox and innovative ideas• Low Stress• Risk taking

High uncertainty avoidance

• Many rules• Low tolerance of novel/unorthodox ideas; resistance to change• High stress•Risk adverse

Assumptions

Once the three components of the "interacting HRM/Culture/Migration" sys-tem have been established the following assumptions were introduced beforethe data analysis:

• Human potential is a core factor for competitiveness• Globalisation enhances its mobility• Migration processes have influenced change in the perception of HRM.

Modern HRM is not only responding but is also actively shaping these proc-esses.

The author proposes the following diagram which indicates that the threephenomena are linked in a non-linear way, i.e., they influence one another in amore complex way than a simple cause-effect relationship.

The model is therefore presented as a triangle of interacting factors:

122 Anna Murdoch

Modem Human Resource Management

Migration Processes

Dimensions of culture

What now followed was data collection, i.e., the volume of migration con-cerning Poland in a specific period. The data used for this analysis were theofficial migration figures published by GUS for migration to and from Polandin the year 2002. The data constitutes a modest but a reliable source for calcula-tions.

DataMigration to and from Poland in 2002

Region and countryEuropeEUformer USSRArmeniaAustriaBelarusBelgiumCanadaFranceGermanyGreeceItalyKazakhstanLithuaniaNetherlandsNorwayRussiaSpain

Immigration4,4133.575920

5015613061230247

2,3356025122140?33186

Emigration20.48520,196

47.5

5253

1191,016339

17,8067530244

2904713

Balance-16,072-16,621

873

45-369127-58-786-92

-15,471-15-5121736

-207-1673

Diversity and Complementarity of Cultures as Principles of Universal Civilization 123

SwedenSwitzerlandUKUkraineUSAVietnam

637041208350

1,137124

1661748825411

2.676—

-103-104-47-45339

-1,539124

Source: E. K?pinska (2003), p. 9 (in tum "based entirely on the official statistical data gatheredby the Central Statistical Office in Poland").

Data analysis

The idea then was to compare and contrast culture dimensions with Poland'smigration directions and their volume. The purpose of this exercise was to ob-serve any potential indications as to the relation between the directions and vol-ume of migration outflow and culture dimensions.

Methodology

• Major migration outflows from Poland in 2002 have been analysed (Ger-many. USA, Canada, Austria, France, Italy, the Netherlands, the UK, Sweden,Belgium, Switzerland, Greece, Norway).

• The differences in Hofstede's four dimensions of culture indices have beencalculated (index value for Poland minus index value for the destination coun-try, e.g., PDI for Poland=68, PDI for Germany=35, PDI difference=68-35=33).

The purpose of this calculation was to quantify the direction and scale of dif-ference between the two countries for each dimension.

• The weighted averages of the dimension index differences for the destina-tion countries have been calculated (weight: the volume of the emigration to agiven country to the total volume of emigration from Poland to the countriesanalysed), e.g.,

PDI difference Poland and Germany = 33Emigration to Gertnany =17 806PDI difference between Poland and Norway = 37Emigration to Norway = 47Total emigration from Poland = 23 711Weighted PDI difference = (33x17 806 + ... + 37x47) / 23711 = 31,9

The purpose of this calculation was to quantify how different (on average)Poland and her top emigration destinations are in terms of each dimension. Theweights were used as a standard way to show the importance of each destinationin relation to its culture dimension. In other words the more "popular" a destina-

124 Anna Murdoch

tion is, the more impact its culture has on the one number illustrating the cul-tural differences.

Finally, the proportion of the weighted index difference to the index value inPoland has been calculated, e.g.,

Weighted PDI difference = 31,9PDI in Poland = 68PDI ratio = 31,9/68 = 47%The purpose of this calculation was to express relatively (i.e., in %) the aver-

age cultural difference between Poland and the top destinations in a given di-mension.

The same method has been applied to calculate all the results conceming theother three dimensions.

Results

The following values have been calculated and entered in the table below:— Differences between dimension indices— Weighted averages of dimension index differences— Weighted averages as percentages of the dimension indices in Poland

Dimension index difTerences between Poland and the destination country

DestinationcountryGermanyUSACanadaAustriaFranceItalyNetherlandsUKSwedenBeigiuniSwitzerlandGreeceNorway

Emigrationin 2002

17.8062.6761.016

525339302290254174119887547

23.711

PDI differ-ence

33282957

018303337

334

837

31,907511280,469228107

IDV differ-ence

-7-31-20

5Al-16-20-29-11-15-825-9

-10,54240648-0,175706775

MAS differ-ence

-22

126421-650-25910•6

756

2,063008730,032234511

UAI differ-ence

284745237

18405864-I35

-1943

30,828265360,331486724

The table sums up what's been calculated using the methodology. The num-ber in red is the weighted average difference, the one in bold type directly be-neath it—the relative weighted average difference.

For the emigration figures in Poland 2002, the major destination countriessubstantially differed from Poland in the values of the three out of fourHofstede's dimensions, and power distance was the most important:

Diversity and Complementarity of Cultures as Principles of Universal Civilizanon 125

' Power Distance (47%)• Uncertainty Avoidance (33%)• Individualism (-18%)

Based on this, a one-off, observation, in one year and disregarding any otheremigration-enhancing factors as well as in the absence of any comparative ma-terial a tentative conclusion describing the relation between the migration out-flow and the culture dimensions may be formulated as follows:

The lower the PDI and the UAI in the destination country, the bigger the mi-gration outflow from Poland.

The higher the IDV in the destination country, the bigger the outflow fromPoland.

CONCLUSIONS

Below is a graphic attempt to visualize this proposed relation:

• The lower the PDI and the UAI in the destination country, the bigger theniigration outflow from Poland.

• The higher the IDV in the destination country, the bigger the outflowfrom Poland.

PDI UAI MAS IDV

Statistically significant verification of the hypothesis will require a longitu-dinal study including time series of data for various countries. It is also possibleto observe the various sources of statistics for migration out of Poland and com-pare it to the pre-2004 trends and after 2004 trends as well as the impact of thegradual release of restrictions for legal labour migration to the respective EUcountries.

Implications

Seeking the best opportunities for one's potential has been becoming a rec-ognized and sanctioned human right across more countries. To what degree ithas been caused and/or affected by globalization, modernization, deeper under-standing of individual and societal needs lies beyond the scope of this paper.However, it would be very interesting to investigate further how migrating inorder to explore and enjoy one's potential (or simply to avoid its waste) coin-cides with cultural dimensions. Below is a possible list and an attempt of inter-

126 Anna Murdoch

pretation of some of the consequences of seeking cross-cultural employment(meaning employment in a cross-cultural environment).

Opportunities and threats of migration in cross-cultural environment

Opportunities for indi-viduals

Career prospectsPersonal developmentIncome tnaximisationFast-track career develop-ment for cross-culturallyaware candidates

Threats for individualsDecreased sense of job secu-rityIncreased level of stress dueto cross-cultural exposureNomadic life-stylePersonal loss

Opportunities for en-terprises

Lower labour costs foremployers in immigrantcountriesIncreased competitionon labour marketsPool of cross-culturallyaware candidates

Threats for enterprisesCross-cultural conflicts- decreased efficiencyDeficit of and increasingdemand for cross-culturally competentmanagers

Opportunities for econo-mies

Brain gainImproved demographicstructure in immigrant statesMore diversified workforceattracting FDI inflow

Threats for economiesBrain drainEndangered demographicstructure in emigrant statesas well as weakened socialties and undermined socialcohesionSocial pressure in immigrantstates and threats of populistleaders coming to power

Suggestions and questions for further discussion

It would be interesting to explore further the possible links between migra-tion and Human Resource Management as well as investigate the hypothesisthat they may be reciprocally and dynamically linked with Hofstede's dimen-sions of culture. The author's suggestions for further research (some of which-she is already considering) are as follows:

1. establish a cluster of ceteris paribus conditions (such as GDP per capitaand the average salary) in a given sample of countries which are destinationsof Polish migrants, isolate one culture dimension (e.g., PDI) and comparethe volume of migration—one of the hypotheses being that the country withthe lower PDI (while other conditions are similar) would attract more mi-grants,

2. investigate such sociological issues as creating pools and networks of mi-grants in a destination country which then pull/ attract other migrants—family, relatives, friends, acquaintances—and look for possible correlationswith culture dimensions,

Diversity and Complementarity of Cultures as Principles of Universal Civilization 127

3. establish migration data for two countries (sources of emigration), isolatetheir PDIs and see if there are any significant relationships there,

4. select two countries (both sources of emigration) with a similar PDI andcompare their migration destinations,

5. extrapolate the above conclusions onto culture dimensions particularly at-tractive to migrant profiles with a cluster of specific Human Capital skills.

REFERENCES

Ageing Populations: High Time for Action., background paper prepared by the OECDSecretariat for the Meeting of G8 Employment and Labor Ministers, London, 10-11March 2005.

Baron J. N., Kreps D. M., Strategic Human Resources, John Wiley & Sons, Inc NewYork 1999.

Bartlett C.A., Ghoshal S., Transnational Management, Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston1992.

Berry J.W., Poortinga Y.H., Segall M. H., & Dasen P. R., Cross-cultural Psychology.Research and Application, Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Beynon J. i Dunkerley D. (ed.) Globalization. The Reader, The Athlone Press, London2000.

Bijak J., Kicinger A., Kupiszewski M., International Migration Scenarios for 27 Euro-pean Countries, 2002-2052 (Central European Forum for Migration ResearchWorking Paper 4/2004).

Cielem^cki M.. "Nasze mdzgi z importu", Wprost, 14 September 2003, pp. 36-39.Faist T., The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Transnational So-

cial Spaces, Clarendon Press, Oxford 2000.Foot D.K., Stoffman Boom, Bust & Echo, Walther & Ross, Toronto, 1996.Frankfort-Nachmias C , Nachmias D., Metody badawcze w naukach spotecznych, Zysk i

S-ka, Poznari 2001.www.geert-hofstede.com (2005).Ghemawat P., "Distance Still Matters", in Harvard Business Review, September 2001,

pp. 137-147.Hammersley M., Atkinson P., Metody badan terenowych, Zysk i S-ka, Poznari 2000.Hampden-Tumer C , Trompenaars A., Siedem kultur kapitaliz/nu, ABC, Warszawa

1998.Heckman J. J., "Czy nauka si? optaca? - strategie ksztalcenia w waninkach nowej go-

spodarki", series of lectures Inkubator Wiedzy, SGH, 10 October 2001,Hofstede G ., Kultury i organizacje, Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonotniczne, 20(X).

, Culture's consequences. Intemational Differences in Work-Related Values,Sage, Newbury Park 1980.

Jones R.W., "Globalization: Civil and Cultural Conflicts". Gazeta SGH, 1-15 May2002.

K^piiiska E., Recent Trends in the International Migration Poland 2003, series: PRACEMIGRACYJNE, no. 52, Institute for Social Studies Warsaw University, Warsaw,December 2003.

128 Anna Murdoch

Kory5 I., Migration Trends in Selected EU Applicant Countries: Poland (Central Euro-pean Forum for Migration Research Working Paper 5/2003), http://www.cefmr.pan.pl.

Legutko P., "Potrzeba nowych KoH^tajow", Rzeczpospolita, 18-19 June 2003, p. AlO.Levitt T., 'The Globalization of Markets", in Harvard Business Review, May/June

1983.Lewis T.J., Jungman R.E. (red.). On Being Foreign. Culture Shock in Short Fiction. An

International Anthology, Intercultural Press, Yarmouth 1986.Miles M.B., Huberman A.M., Analiza danych jakosciowych, Transhumana, Bialystok

2000.Murdoch A., Wspdlpraca z cudzoziemcami wfirmie, Poltext, Warszawa 1999.Noe R., Hollenbeck J.H., Gerhart B., Wright P. M., Human Resource Management.

Gaining a Competitive Advantage, Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston 2000.Porter M., The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Harvard Business Review,

March/April 1990.Stark 0., Era of global migration: in search for a paradigm, seminar, Warsaw Univer-

sity, April 28, 2005.Stark O., Migration: Motives, Incentives, Outcomes, series of lectures at the Warsaw

School of Economics, October 2004., Tlie New Economics of the Brain Drain: How it all Started and How it is

Evolving, seminar April 2005.Stonehouse G., Hamill J., Campbell D., Purdie T., Global and Transnational Business.

Strategy and Management, Wiley, Chichester 2000.Straubhaar T., Intemational Mobility of the Highly Skilled: Brain Gain, Brain Drain or

Brain Exchange, HWWA Discussion Paper, 88, Hamburg Institute of InternationalEconomics, 2000.

Ten Years of Global Relocation Trends: 1993-2004, GMAC Global Relocation Ser-vices, 2004.

'Tertiary Education in Poland", The World Bank Report, no. 29718, Warsaw 2004.'The cotning hordes". The Economist, January 17, 2004.Triandis H.C., Heron A. (ed.). Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, vol. 4. Devel-

opmental, Boston, Allyson & Bacon 1981.Trompenaars F., Hampden-Turner C , Managing People Across Cultures, Capstone

Publishing Ltd, Chichester 2004."Who gains from immigration?". The Economist, June 26, 2002.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR — Ph.D. in Economic Sciences from the Warsaw School ofEconomics; Adjunct Professor in the Department of Intemational Comparative Studiesin this School; an MA from Warsaw University; a BA (Hons) from Thames ValleyUniversity in London. She studies also at Vienna University, Free University in Berlin,University in Guadalajara in Mexico. A visiting professor at the University of Calgary,Canada, and at University of Barcelona. Specialization: areas of cross-cultural manage-ment, creative methods of problem solving in advertising, public relations, managementand negotiations.