introduction - au purepure.au.dk/portal/files/45283948/jo86695_ac86281.php.… · web...

HA - engelsk / BSc(IM) Student: Jekaterina Oborina

Student: Anastasija Cibesova

Bachelor thesis Supervisor: Valerie Smeets

Organizational culture versus National culture in

Mediterranean Shipping Company

Aarhus University

Business and Social Sciences

1 May 2012

2Organizational culture versus National culture in MSCBScB(IM) 2012

Table of ContentsIntroduction......................................................................................................................................................4

Problem statement.......................................................................................................................................5

Delimitations................................................................................................................................................6

Method.............................................................................................................................................................7

Interviews and questionnaire.......................................................................................................................7

Analysis.........................................................................................................................................................9

Theoretical background..................................................................................................................................10

National Culture.........................................................................................................................................10

Foundations of organizational culture........................................................................................................10

Multinational organization.........................................................................................................................11

National versus organizational culture.......................................................................................................12

Geert Hofstede...........................................................................................................................................13

Intercultural Dimensions........................................................................................................................13

Other studies in this field........................................................................................................................15

Criticism of Hofstede`s study......................................................................................................................16

Empirical data.................................................................................................................................................16

Company overview.....................................................................................................................................18

MSC Holding...............................................................................................................................................23

Analysis...........................................................................................................................................................23

MSC organizational Culture........................................................................................................................23

Data analysis...............................................................................................................................................43

Collectivism versus individualism...........................................................................................................43

Masculinity versus femininity.................................................................................................................46

Graph 2. Male versus Female manager ratio per county............................................................................48

MSC organization culture through employee recruiting and retaining...................................................49

Conclusion......................................................................................................................................................54

References......................................................................................................................................................57


Links............................................................................................................................................................58

Appendices.....................................................................................................................................................60

Appendix 1. Questionairre..........................................................................................................................60

Appendix 2. Interview with the CEO Lars Funding......................................................................................60

Appendix 3. Rate of responsiveness...........................................................................................................62

Appendix 4. Male versus Female manager ratio.........................................................................................63

Appendix 5. Summary of Hofstede`s classification.....................................................................................64

The results of survey...............................................................................................................................65

Appendix 6. Qualtrics Report......................................................................................................................65

Appendix 7. Summary of all responses.......................................................................................................69


IntroductionThe business world today has become extremely globalized. Companies are

forced to operate internationally in order to compete successfully on the

market, regardless of the sphere or nature of business. Even the smaller

enterprises, which might not be global within it, are still in the network of

international customers, partners, suppliers. The modern world has enabled

faster information flow and exchange, as well as easier access to it thorough

the World Wide Web. The information on the internet is coming from the

various sources, which provides the users with a complete overview of the

current situation in the business, economical and political world.

The job market today has become very international. This is provided by

simplified migration legislations, opened borders of EU, Shengen zone and

others. Society has become more mobile; this relates to both social and

geographical mobility. People are free to travel and move their businesses- a

person from China can go for job in USA, have business partners in Australia

and go for vacation in Europe; and modern jobseekers are sending out CVs

globally. Expatriation and impatriation has become a common practice for all

multinational corporations.

In the globalization, pushed to the limits, the managers in the multinational

corporations have to be educated in international-business to understand,

estimate and foresee the challenges that multinational environment might

cause.

We see one of the main challenges for multinational company a transfer of

corporate culture and values to each individual local national office or

subsidiary. Corporate culture is a significant aspect of company`s

development, differentiating the organization in the international context.


Our paper is conducting a research in the shipping field. The nature of activity

of the shipping companies is pushing the freight carriers to maximize their

geographical area of service coverage- meaning to be able to operate in every

corner of the world.

We have chosen to base our research on the second largest container

operator in the world- Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC). We see a

challenge for this company to include a large variety of different nationalities

and cultures, which have to operate in the same manner, following the

common corporate values, strategy in order to achieve a common goal.

Problem statement

Our paper will be within the scope of international business and

organizational behavior. We will analyze the chosen company- MSC from

these two perspectives. Our goal is to give an individual characteristic to every

country within MSC, according to Geert`s Hofstede study of the cultural

dimensions differentiating national features. We will describe the company

culture of Mediterranean Shipping Company - the core values, ethics, mission

and strategy, which unify all the national offices of MSC. Our research and

analysis will look at the interaction of organizational culture and national

culture through the angle of selection, recruitment, hiring and promotion of

employees. We will look at how much employees differ across basis criteria as

age, gender, education in each of the studied MSC offices, thus evaluating if

the preference of MSC for employee selection and recruiting is the same all

over.

However, the biggest challenge for our research is to characterize the

countries within MSC, which were not studied by Hofstede. We will try to

describe them relating to some of the dimensions, with accordance to the

features, which Hofstede determined for each of these dimensions.


DelimitationsOur study is spread only within the particular entity of MSC- MSC Scandinavia

Holding (we will describe it in more detail further on in our paper), which

includes only 16 countries mentioned below, as we were allowed to access its

employees personal data and company figures. Another limitation is that we

base our analysis only on Hofstede`s work, although in our paper we mention

all the most famous and recognized researches in this field. The conclusions

from analysis of the interaction of organizational culture and national culture

are based on the angle of our research- the recruitment, hiring and promotion

of employees.

And the most crucial limitation for our research is that the confidence level of

a country relation to one or another cultural dimension (the country, not

covered in Hofstede`s study) is not very high. The survey we used for

collecting the data does not allow us to state it strongly due to the variance in

rate of responses (varies from 38 to 71 percent) and the number of

employees across every country (from 7 employees in Kazakhstan till 70

people in Latvia). The survey which was sent out to employees and managers

had to contain minimum questions and limited options for answers, because it

was sent out and completed during the working hours of people. As our goal

was to collect the maximum amount of data from each country, this implied

that the completion of the survey had to take minimum time and effort. The

questions were mostly determined on highlighting the angle of our research:

the basic features of employees hired in MSC.

Mediterranean Shipping Company is a privately owned enterprise, which

implies that the annual reports and other financial data are unavailable for

publicity.


MethodIn order to perform the analysis in the main thesis, we had to choose a

successful multinational company. For analysis to answer the questions stated

in our thesis, the chosen company had to fulfill several criteria. First of all, the

company had to be multinational with an office in Denmark, since this is the

field where we are active. Since our thesis is focusing on the intercultural

differences, the only differentiating feature of every office, covered by our

research, is a country of location only, status and function within MSC had to

be homogeneous, meaning that offices should not be divided into

manufacturing- service or headquarters- subsidiaries. Given the angle of our

analysis of the interaction between the organizational culture and the

national culture, which is the employee’s selection and recruitment, we

wanted to base our study on the service company, where customer

relationship management is a core competence and employees interact with

the clients on a daily basis. This is crucial factor for our angle, since the

employees in such company, with this nature of work, are the direct

representatives of the company.

We have chosen MSC, because it has fulfilled all the above mentioned

criteria, being a successful multinational organization, placed as second

largest container operator in the shipping industry worldwide. For our data

collection and analysis we have chosen MSC Scandinavia Holding, which is a

part of MSC and includes independent offices in 16 countries.

Interviews and questionnaire

For collecting the data for our research we have used both qualitative and

quantitative methods. As a quantitative method of research we have chosen

to use an online survey- Qualtrics Survey Software. We have designed an

online questionnaire consisting of 7 basic multiple choices questions (see the

Appendix 1). The questionnaire was structured non-disguised, which implies

that the questions were listed in pre-arranged order and the participants were


informed of the purposes of data collection. The questions were close-ended,

given that participants had to select from the fixed list of replies. We have

chosen a mail survey approach for questionnaire distribution. We sent the link

to the general e-mail address of each MSC Scandinavia Holding (MSC- SH)

office, which every employee is a part of, thus covering all 755 people working

for this company. We have chosen the mail survey, as it is the most

economically reasonable method, which involved minimum financial

resources from our side and this method has the highest geographical

coverage. This method also excludes the interviewer`s bias, thus, considering

all above mentioned advantages mail survey is the most appropriate data

collection method in our situation. The questionnaire was aimed to collect the

maximum responses across all the MSC-SH offices, therefore the questions

were not too much in depth. The questions were designed to characterize the

MSC employee across basic features: nationality, age, gender, education,

position, and years of experience. The software we have used for online data

collection has estimated the average time for completing one questionnaire,

which is 37 seconds. The timing was a very important aspect for the survey.

The time used by employees for completing our survey was constrained by

their tight working schedule. The data collected in the survey provided us with

the necessary information about the employees; however the personal

information per individual stays confidential, which was a condition that had

to be applied for the survey.

In order to find out the current situation of MSC-SH in international context

we have interviewed the CEO of MSC-SH, Mr. Lars Funding (see interview in

Appendix 2). He gave us his opinion on how MSC SH is coping with the

intercultural differences between its 16 countries and the overview of how

these challenges are influencing management of the company. We have

conducted a focus interview as a qualitative aspect of our study. We have

chosen this type of interview to interpret statistically significant findings,

parallel with our quantified study. We have used unstructured opened


questions for the interview to avoid giving a direction for the responses and

reveal the personal context of his answers. The opinion of Mr. Lars Funding

was very important, giving a bigger weight for our statements and

conclusions, because he is the person managing the serious issues with

intercultural communication within MSC SH and represents all 16 countries of

MSC-SH in other MSC agencies worldwide.

AnalysisThe aim of the analysis was to combine the theory, empirical and qualitative

data. In our thesis, the sector is the shipping industry, the company is

represented by Mediterranean Shipping Company, and the nationalities are

the local offices representatives of MSC – SH. We have been exploring the

field of our research- MSC using the deductive method. Meaning, firstly we

have described MSC as one multinational organization, with its values, history,

corporate goals, and strategy. Afterwards followed by focus on MSC-SH as a

part of MSC and finally we have examined separately each local agency within

MSC-SH.

Since we have defined the field of our thesis and chosen the subject for

research, our goal of study has gone through various evolutionary stages.

Many materials from the theory we have studies for our thesis, failed to be

applied successfully in practice, when collecting and analyzing data. Since we

have sent out the questionnaires, we have been noticing different tendencies

in the respondent behavior across countries. We have also received a number

of feedbacks about the goals and means of our research from the regional and

country managers, as well as the department managers. The feedbacks were

different- some managers were concerned about the privacy of their

employees, some were concerned about us revealing the confidential data

about the company, some managers gave advices and showed a lot of interest

in our study. We have been taking a lot of notes during the entire work

process- after communicating with some of the MSC Denmark employees and

other people from the shipping industry. During this process our vision of the


problem statement and the ways of interpreting the collected data has

modified.

Theoretical background

National Culture

Various studies exist on the subject of culture. Today hundreds of definitions

exist to explain this term. Culture is what differentiates members of one social

group from anther, what is passed from older generation to younger

generation and what shapes the way they perceive the world. This is

expressed through their behaviors and values. Anthropologists Kroeben and

Klucholm have come up with the most optimal and generally accepted

definition: “ Culture consists of patterns, explicit and implicit, of behavior

acquired and transmitted by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievement

of human groups, including their embodiment in artifacts; the essential core

of culture consists of traditional (i.e., historically derived and selected) ideas

and especially their attached values; culture systems may, on the one hand,

be considered as products of actions, on the other, as conditioning elements

of future action.”(Nancy J. Adler, Allison Gundersen 2010: 18)

Foundations of organizational culture

Organizational culture can be defined as “the collective programming of the

mind that distinguishes the members of one organization from another”

(Hofstede & Hofstede 2005: 282-283). It is “the set of shared, taken for

granted implicit assumptions that a group holds and that determines how it

perceives, thinks about and reacts to its various environments.”

Organizational culture has three important characteristics: it is passed on to

new employees through the process of socialization, influences the behavior

at work, and operates at two levels, which vary in terms of outward visibility


and resistance to change (Organizational Behavior, Aarhus School of Business,

2011: 425). The socialization process is the process of person learning the

values, norms and behaviors, which allow him to be a member of that

organization and is the main mechanism of embedding the organizational

culture.

On the visible level the culture is represented by artefacts- the physical

manifestations of an organizational culture, for example: dress-code,

observable rituals and ceremonies, decorations, logos. On the less visible level

of culture are the organizational values and believes. They are persistent

characteristics, resistant to changes (Organizational Behavior, Aarhus School

of Business, 2011: 426).

Organizational culture has four main functions: firstly, gives its` members an

organizational identity: to distinguish the members of particular organizations

from the others. Secondly, to facilitate collective commitment, meaning to

encourage common goals and make employees proud of belonging to the

organization. Another function is to promote social system stability; this

proves employees with security and comfort within the organization, through

the effective management of changes and conflicts. Finally, the fourth

function is- shaping behavior by helping members to make sense of their

surroundings, meaning that organization helps employees to understand why

it does what it does and how it is going to accomplish the long-term goals

(Organizational Behavior, Aarhus School of Business, 2011: 429-431).

Multinational organization

Multinational companies are enterprises which operate in more than one

country. Given the international workforce, suppliers and customers, they

have to face the global competition and take into account world`s economical

and political situation, meaning that they have to act as a global player as well

as have local responsibilities at the same time. This position brings a lot of


advantages (less dependence on the economy or political situation of one

single country; differentiated marked position; use of synergies- diverse

visions and therefore solutions of a single problem) but also implies the

challenge to combine many different nationalities and cultures under one roof

(Sabine Scheffknecht 2007: 73).

National versus organizational culture

The difference of national and organizational cultures is rooted in their

different mix of values and practices. National cultures are part of the

personality, which is built during the first ten years of our lives, in the family

and in the living environment, at school, and it contains most of our basic

values. Organizational cultures are acquired when we enter a workplace as

adults, with our values firmly in place, and organization values consist mainly

of the organization’s practices- they are more superficial (Hofstede &

Hofstede 2005: 284).

Neither managers nor researches know for sure the answer to what extent

does the organizational culture influence national culture- enhances or

diminished the national effect. However, unambiguous conclusion is that

employees maintain or enhance their culturally specific ways of working when

employed in the multinational organization. There are various hypothesis of

why this is the case. It might be driven by the pressure from the foreign-

owned company to form a single organizational culture, which brings out

employees resistance. Perhaps our ethnic culture is so deeply ingrained in us

by the time we reach adulthood that a company’s organizational culture

cannot erase it. (Nancy J. Adler, Allison Gundersen 2010: 65).

“Effective shared practices are the reason that multinational corporations can

function at all. Employing multinational personnel, they cannot assume

common values. They coordinate and control their operations through

worldwide practices inspired by their national origin but that can be learned


by employees from a variety of other national origins” (Hofstede & Hofstede

2005: 286).

Geert Hofstede

Geert Hofstede (1928)- a Dutch professor of social sciences, who interpreted a

summary of factors, which determine cultural characteristics of different

nationalities, based on research conducted in 1960-1970. The study was

conducted within IBM, in its 60 international offices. The research has been

conducted by means of questionnaires, collected from 116 thousand IBM

employees. Each questionnaire contained 150 questions, which revealed how

and to which extent do the cultural differences affect structure and the

environment of organization. Hofstede was the one who managed to measure

cultural and cultural differences, not just give them verbal description.

Hofstede recognized 5 independent dimensions, which explain and systemize

intercultural differences. These dimensions are Individualism versus

Collectivism, Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Masculinity versus

Femininity, Long versus Short term orientation.

Intercultural Dimensions

Individualism vs. Collectivism

Individualism implies loose knit society, where people take care and look after

primarily after themselves and their immediate families, considering

themselves as separate individuals. Collectivism is characterized by tight social

network, where people consider themselves as a part of a group and

distinguish their group from another group. All members of the group have

common goals and expect social protection and security from each other in

exchange to loyalty. Members of collectivistic society place more importance

of fitting in and saving face, whereas in individualistic societies people


emphasize individual self- respect. (Nancy J. Adler, Allison Gundersen 2010:

52-53)

Power Distance

Power distance reflects the extent to which less powerful members of

organizations accept an unequal distribution of power. (Nancy J. Adler, Allison

Gundersen 2010: 54) Such inequality exists in every culture and organization,

however it differs from culture to culture how less powerful members agree

to tolerate this fact.

Uncertainty Avoidance

Uncertainty avoidance – reflects the extent to which people in society feel

threatened by ambiguity and therefore tries to avoid ambiguous situations by

providing greater certainty and predictability. Organizations reduce

uncertainty by establishing more formal rules, rejecting innovative ideas and

behavior, and providing their employees with greater career stability. For

example in countries with high uncertainty avoidance companies offer a life-

time employment, whereas in countries with low uncertainty avoidance high

job mobility is usual. (Nancy J. Adler, Allison Gundersen 2010: 55)

Masculinity vs. Femininity

This dimension also characterized as career success and Quality of life

oriented societies. Career success societies emphasize assertiveness and the

acquisition of money and things (materialism), while not showing particular

concern for people. By contrast, quality-of-life societies emphasize

relationships among people, concern for others, and overall quality of life.

Societies that stress career success usually define more strictly women’s and

men’s roles than do quality-of-life societies (for example, women should take

care of home and children, while men working to provide family). (Nancy J.

Adler, Allison Gundersen 2010: 57)

Long-term vs. Short-term Orientation


This dimension was discovered later by Hofstede in cooperation with his Hong

Kong colleague Michael Bond and was meant to explain the extreme

economic growth in 1990 of the “Asia`s Four Tigers”- Hong Kong, Singapore,

South Korea and Taiwan. Also known as Confucian Dynamism, it measures

employees’ devotion to the work ethic and their respect for tradition. (Nancy

J. Adler, Allison Gundersen 2010: 59)

Other studies in this field

In line with Hofstede there were other scientists, who made a significant

contribution to the field of intercultural differences and their affect on

organizations.

Fons Trompenaars – Dutch author and consultant in field of cross cultural

communication. He identified five culture dimensions: universalism versus

particularism, individualism versus communitarianism, neutral versus

emotionalism, specific versus diffuse and achievement versus ascription.

Edward T. Hall and his wife Mildrerd Reed Hall, who extended a cultural

model with another important dimensions. Firstly, low versus high context

culture, where high context cultures have many “unwritten rules” and low

context cultures use more explicit and direct communications style. This

dimension explains the importance of non verbal signals and modes explicit

messages. This provides an insight on the interaction between cultures and

explains misunderstanding, which occurs in communication (Hall 2011).

Secondly, dimensions of Time (monochromic versus polychromic) and Space

(high territoriality versus low territoriality) were added.

“The GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness)

study of 62 Societies”- a research program, conducted in 1991 by Robert J.

House of the Wharton School of Business, University of Pennsylvania. The


study has clustered 60 out of 62 countries according to their cultural

similarities and has established 9 intercultural dimensions: Performance

Orientation, Uncertainty Avoidance, Humane Orientation, Institutional

Collectivism, In-Group Collectivism, Assertiveness, Gender Egalitarianism,

Future Orientation and Power Distance. (Michael H. Hoppe 2007: 1)

Criticism of Hofstede`s study

The problem of Hofsetede`s research is the possibility of bias of statistical

data, which was collected only from the employees of IBM; the company

which might have very strong organizational culture. This may influence the

data pool in a way that employees were hired with the same qualifications,

skills and education, which eliminate or diminish the cultural difference affect.

Another issue with using Hofstede`s intercultural dimensions as a theoretical

base for our own research, is that fact of 50 years time difference. Hofstede`s

dimensions were developed in 1960. Since then many significant political,

social and economical changes have occurred. They have changed people`s

way of thinking and behaving, as well as many organizations have entered

intercultural phase and adapted to it successfully.

Empirical data

We have chosen to conduct our research in shipping industry. As our paper is

in the scope of international business and organizational behavior in

international context, we found shipping industry to be the most appropriate

for this research. Shipping companies, due to the nature of business, are

forced to operate in various parts of the world and own local offices

worldwide, as well as dealing daily with foreign customers and suppliers.


Shipping industry carries about 90% of international trade

(http://www.marisec.org/shippingfacts/worldtrade/index.php). It is the blood

of the world`s economy. Without shipping export/ import of the raw

materials, affordable food and manufactured goods would be impossible.

Shipping industry today is challenged, as well as given many opportunities by

growing globalization, international trade, more flexible tax regimes and

mobile workforce. This expands the possibilities to develop and grow, but also

sharpens the competition.

According to Bloomberg

(http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-10/freight-rates-poised-to-

tumble-as-35-mile-line-of-ships-passes-coal-demand.html), 2011 was a very

tough year for shipping industry. The freight rates have hit the bottom since

2002. This is tightly connected with the world economy recession, which

caused a decline in global trade. Freight rates are the indicators of the

“economic health”, therefore even thought today we believe that the

recession is over, and economy grows, freight is still in negative figures. This

period for shipping industry is causing much lower turnovers in terms of

money and TEUs, which caused fatal consequences for smaller companies and

created a very sharp competition on the freight carrier`s market.

According to AXA- Alphaliner TOP 100 2011, the top ten biggest container

operators are as follows.

Rank Operator TEU Share Existing fleet/ Orderbook1 A.P.M- Maersk 2.518,522 15.9% 2 MSC 2.097,828 13.2% 3 CMA CGM Group 1.343,835 8.5% 4 COSCO Cntr L. 646,310 4.1% 5 Hapag-Lloyd 643,667 4.1% 6 APL 617,424 3.9% 7 Evergreen Line 614,278 3.9% 8 CSCL 533,867 3.4% 9 Hanjin Shipping 468,562 3.0%

10 MOL 435,469 2.7%

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-10/freight-rates-poised-to-tumble-as-35-mile-line-of-ships-passes-coal-demand.html


http://www.marisec.org/shippingfacts/worldtrade/index.php


Picture1. AXC- Alphaliner TOP 100 Container Operators 2011

(http://www.marisec.org/shippingfacts/worldtrade/top-ten-container-operators.php)

Company overview

MSC – Mediterranean Shipping Company was based in 1970 by Captain G.

Aponte, which started when he bought his first ship, Patricia, followed my

Rafaela and began a shipping line operating between Mediterranean and

Somalia. In 1977 the company has significantly expanded through purchasing

of second-hand ships and was operating services in Northern Europe, Africa

and Indian Ocean and by the end of 1980 MSC operated ships to North

America and Australia. In 1989 MSC has expanded through opening a branch

of the main business- the cruise liner business. The name of the branch is MSC

Cruises.

Today, MSC provides cargo movement through dedicated transshipment

hubs, performs swift connections and efficient on-carriage services. MSC is a

privately owned shipping line with the headquarters located in Geneva,

Switzerland. MSC has 421 local offices in 145 countries which employs 50000

professionals. MSC has become a second largest freight carrier in the world in

terms of container slot capacity and in number of container vessels operating.

MSC operates in 6 continents, calling 335 ports through 200 direct and

combined weekly liner services. Remarkably, MSC has grown through years

with organic growth, not thought mergers and acquisitions.

MSC has also invested in crew training, shipyards, container workshops, ship

planning centers and dangerous cargo management centers, which control

the proper stowage of hazardous cargo worldwide through a very

sophisticated MSC computer systems.

(http://www.mscgva.ch/about_us/agents.html)

http://www.mscgva.ch/about_us/agents.html

http://www.marisec.org/shippingfacts/worldtrade/top-ten-container-operators.php


In order to show MSC`s position on the market we chose to use the SWOT

(Strength-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats) analysis of the main players in

the global shipping industry arena.

1. A.P. Moller-Maersk

(Article: Business Monitor International Ltd.: Japan Shipping Report, Q2, 2011,

p. 46-51)

A.P.M. Maersk is a highly diversified group with a significant presence in the

shipping sector- accounts for around 15 percent of total global TEU capacity1.

The company was formed in 1904 in Denmark and since then has become the

biggest and the world`s most recognized shipping conglomerates. The group

employs approximately 110000 people in 130 countries, and is also active in

gas and oil sectors.

Strengths:

- The world`s largest container shipping line, with a biggest market share than

any other carrier. Expanding fleet allows catching up the trade volumes.

- Maersk Line is a part of A.P.M Maersk – a large diversified group active within

the gas and oil and terminal-operating sectors, which gives a lot of power to

the company as the actor in shipping industry and enables to lobby.

Weaknesses:

- A large fleet is causing constantly a risk of overcapacity.

- Its presents in oil and gas sectors declines the hedging options of the

company, since it is over -relying on the sector as a whole. It can be dangerous

if, for example, the oil prices affect directly the bunker prices.

Opportunities:

- The company is planning to design and built 18000 TEU vessels

Treats:

- Company trades is DKK, therefore is sensitive to the DKK/USD exchange rate

fluctuations

- The correlation of oil and bunker prices threatens profits.

1 20-foot equivalent unit


2. Mediterranean Shipping Company


p. 53-55)

Strengths:

- MSC is the second largest container shipper in the world, covering the direct

port calls better than any of its competitors

- The long-term strategy for future development - ordering the largest vessel

ever classified by Germanischer Lloyd2 and expansion of the Panama Canal.

- Company is not averse to chartering, which permits MSC to expand fleet

Weaknesses:

- Large fleet is a risk of overcapacity

Opportunities:

- Well positioned to capture the future volumes, as the global trade is

expanding

- Recent partnership with CMA-CGM for fleet sharing. The partnership includes

the sharing of some shipping lines and creating new ones for MSC together

with CMA- CGM, which would expand MSC port coverage and increase

flexibility.

Threats:

- By scrapping some if its fleet, company becomes reliant on the chartering, if it

wants to retain the market share. This can become expensive when charter

rates increase.

3. CMA- CGM


p. 56-63)

2 GL- Assurance, consulting and classification for the maritime and energy industries (http://www.gl-group.com/en/index.php)

http://www.gl-group.com/en/index.php


Is the world`s third largest shipping line. Compagnie Genarale Maritime (CGM)

was formed in 1977 with the merger of the Messageries Maritimes (MessMar)

and the Compagnie Generale Transatlantique (Transat). Compagnie Maritme

Affretement (CMA) was founded the following year, 1978. The group has a

special focus on the reefer cargo and also operates in the tourist industry,

through its subsidiary Croiseres et Tourisme.

Strengths:

- Third largest shipping line in the world, has acquired a number of diversified

subsidiaries, enabling to expand to various markets across the globe.

- CMA-CGM`s multi-modal divisions provides the customer with am integrated

door-to-door service.

Weaknesses:

- Large fleet is a risk of overcapacity

- The firm is not as diverse as the competitors

Opportunities:

- Partnership with MSC is a deal with a big potential for CMA. Sharing routs and

fleet can expand the business fields for both companies.

Threats:

- The company must ensure that it does not place the importance of increase of

market share over the recovery.

4. COSCO


p. 79-83)

China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO) dates back to 1961. Group was

originally engaged in transport solutions but did not become a shipping

company until 1993. In 2005, the company issued an initial public offering and

now trades on stock exchange. Today COSCO has a strong presence in all

major cargo shipping sectors, including container shipping, dry and liquid bulk,

as well as terminal and logistics operations and shipbuilding.


Strengths:

- Highly diversified, this supports sustained growth and stability

- Strong relationships with Bank of China, which supported COSCO with a

source of credit since 1960s

Weaknesses:

- Huge orderbook of fleet, which might result in excess capacity and

significant financial obligations.

Opportunities:

- Growing demand for raw materials in China can secure COSCO with ling term

demand for dry bulk shipping services.

Threats:

- Overcapacity remains risk

5. HAPAG-LLOYD


p. 68-71)

Hapag Lloyd has a 160 year history dating back to the foundation of German

lines Hamburg-Amerikanische-Packetfahrt-Acttien-Gesellschaft and

Norddeutscher Lloyd (NDL). The two lines merged in 1970 to form Hapag-

Lloyd. In 1997, the line became a subsidiary of German tourism giant TUI AG,

which purchased 100 percent of shares in Hapag-Lloyd in 2002.

Strengths:

- The company has expertise in the transportation of dangerous goods, the

shipment of special cargo and stowage

- The company has a huge global presence and shares in two terminals : The

Montreal Gateway Terminal and the Container- Terminal Altenwerder GmbH.

Weaknesses:

- Today Hapag-Lloyd operates only in container market

- Company had to rely on the state aid to carry it through the downturn

Opportunities:


- The company is set to join the mega-vessel club with four vessels with a

capacity of 13200 TEUs each on order

- In association with Grand Alliance carriers enables it to enter into vessel-

sharing agreements or jointly operated services with ease.

Threats:

- Overcapacity risk

- Hapag- Lloyd trades in EUR, which might negatively influence the profits due

to the volatility of the EUR/ USD exchange rate.

MSC Holding

MSC`s international strategy is to optimize the workflow in a way that the

company’s strategic centers are running 24/7. Therefore the documentation

centers are placed in Hong Kong (responsible for the Far and East), in Denmark

(Central and Eastern Europe) and in Caribbean (USA, South America).

Our scope of research is the European entity- MSC Scandinavia Holding. It

includes 16 countries and the headquarters are located in Copenhagen. The

16 countries work in the same Shipping Business Application software. The

export documentation, finance and IT support of all 16 courtiers are handled

in Riga, Latvia. All 16 countries after comparing them across 6 Hofstede`s

intercultural dimensions show to be significantly different in a way people

perceive the world and work ethics. This means that the common corporate

values have been applied in different local conditions. This also affects the

way each country should be managed and led. The same management style

can’t be applied to Russia and Sweden, for example.

Analysis

MSC organizational Culture

Every company and organization shares some common features which help

them to stand out among the other players on the field. This is what


organizational culture serves for. Organizational culture gives the sense of

belonging to the employees of the organization. Especially a multinational

company has to embed an organizational culture in every agency, since the

employees are spread all over the world. Therefore it is important that they

feel united over distance and still belonging to the same entity and following

common goals. There are 11 mechanisms known for accomplishing this

(Aarhus School of Business, Organizational Behavior, 2011: p. 434):

- Formal statement of organizational philosophy, mission, vision, values and

materials used for recruiting, selection, socialization

- The design of physical space, work environment and buildings

- Slogans, language, acronyms and sayings,

- Deliberate role modeling, training programs , teaching and coaching by

managers and supervisors,

- Explicit rewards, status symbols and promotion criteria

- Stories, legends and myths about the key people of events

- The organizational activities, processes or outcomes that leaders pay

attention to, measure and control,

- Leader actions to critical incidents and organizational crises

- The workflow and organizational structure

- Organizational systems and procedures

- Organizational goals and the associated criteria used for employee

recruitment, selection, development, promotion, lay-offs, retirement.

The Mediterranean Shipping Company, as a multinational organization, puts a

lot of emphasis on organizational culture, as a factor differentiating each MSC

local agency worldwide. It has a strong power in terms of uniting and

motivating the employees. MSC organizational culture can be characterized as

external control culture type. MSC is operating in the industry, where

competition is very sharp, goal achievement is highly valued (the company

states its goals very clearly to the employees), and a battle for the market


share is constantly present between the main actors in the shipping field. The

organization formulated a clear mission combining economic and non-

economic objectives, which inspire, motivate and give direction to all

organization members. “Realizing the dream” and “beating the competition”

is a common inspiring theme. MSC organizational culture is built upon six core

values, which are highlighted on the intra and extranet of the company, and

which managers refer to when conducting status meeting with the staff.

These core values are: Trust, Responsibility, Common Sense, Enthusiasm,

Teamwork, Results.

Responsibility encourages employees to be responsible for whatever action

and decision they make. Every person in MSC is in charge of his own tasks and

actions. Employees are responsible for taking care of their customers and

serve them in the best possible way. Customer focus is extremely important.

This core value implies not only the individual responsibility, but also social

responsibility- meaning eliminating corrupt and unethical behavior, which

might harm the community, its people and environment.

Common Sense implies using logic in all situations, in order to solve them in

the best interest of the company. Common sense dominates over the

structures and manuals, which will never be a replacement for taking

responsibility and acting thoughtfully.

Trust is a firm belief in honesty, integrity and reliability. Mutual trust within

the company creates a foundation for effective communication and

motivation, which is a base for all good relationships and a favorable working

environment.

Teamwork is co-operative effort by MSC employees to achieve a common

goal. Working together as a team by putting the interests of the company and

customers before the personal ones, is known for bringing the best results.


Enthusiasm must be present in the daily work of every MSC employee. This is

a crucial condition for creating a fruitful working environment and achieving

the best results.

Good results are what keeps the company alive and is a logical outcome when

all above mentioned values are successfully incorporated in company`s

workflow.

MSC is incorporating the organizational culture through the artifacts- the

characteristic symbols of the company- like the logos, yellow color, which is

used in design and decoration of the office buildings (the color of MSC

containers). The company is arranging various events and teaching programs

for the employees. These are in the form of sport events arranged for the

neighbor countries, which have a lot of in common business in commercial

aspect, celebration of New Years Eves and other holydays. The educational

meetings are arranged for the key employees and management to share

knowledge and experience of handling common customers, issues, and day-

to – day operations as well as just to meet in person and create bonds.

The MSC organizational culture is being kept and embedded in MSC

Scandinavia Holding as well. However, as a joined entity it is sharing much

more in common due to its purpose, functionality and structure. As

mentioned above, from the organizational structure point of view, they share

common operational software and internal server, common documentation

and financial centers in Riga, and headquarters in Copenhagen. MSC SH

human resource department arranges annually meetings and interviews with

staff. They conduct an annual motivation survey, where employees disclose

their opinions about management and daily routine. After submitting the

entire results HR manager analyses the employee’s engagement rates and

finds long and short term solutions for improvement. Another annual

procedure is EDD- Employee Development Discussion. The discussion is held

between the manager and his/her employees individually in the end of the


year. This procedure consists of several steps: firstly, both manager and

employee fill in a form, where answer questions about the general

atmosphere in the office and in the department, the achievement of the past

year and objectives for the coming period. The discussion reveals both

interpersonal relationships and professional issues. The EDD is a chance for

employee to inform his manager about their plans for future, both personal

and professional, to express dissatisfaction, to discuss the possibilities of

promotion or changing departments, for example.

Having discussed and described the organizational culture of MSC and all the

measures taken to establish it, we will look at the cultural context – we will

measure, using Hofstede`s intercultural dimension, the cultural differences of

the 16 countries in MSC- SH (as mentioned before, we focus on this particular

entity of MSC). However we can apply Hofstede only to 10 counties, which are

Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Norway, Poland, Russia, Slovenia

and Sweden. We will try to give characteristics to other 6 counties, not

included in Hofstede`s study: Bosnia- Herzegovina, Belarus, Kazakhstan,

Latvia, Lithuania, Uzbekistan, in our further analysis.

The analysis of 10 countries, using Hofstede`s intercultural dimensions, will be

extended by adding the results of our own conducted research. Having

distributed the questionnaire to all employees of MC-SH 16 countries, based

on the collected responses, we will try to confirm or refute Hofsede`s results.

However, we understand, that our results might not match with Hofstede`s

classifications due to various reasons: research was made in a different

company, the questions within the survey were not too much in depth and

not revealing respondent`s personality; we also keep in mind the statistical

error due to not equal amount of people in each county`s office and not 100%

response rate. We have not scored the dimensions, as did Hofstede, however

the responses we obtained can help us to make judgments regarding some of

the dimensions. Given this, we cannot position with certainty every county


within the dimension, we can only detect if it relates to one or another side of

it, for example, if a given country has more features of the masculine or

feminine nature.

Our research will look at the Masculinity versus Femininity dimension through

the following angle: we will measure the rate of management positions in the

office taken by women. As per Hofstede, in feminine societies, women have

equal opportunity and are equally likely to take high positions in the company

as men. This is the case for societies, where people have equal rights and the

social roles and men and women are not strictly defined as: men providing for

the family and women being responsible only for household and bringing up

children. To make the above mentioned conclusion about the respondent

culture, there should be more than one managers` position in the office of a

given country.

Another dimension we will look at is Individualism versus Collectivism. We will

base our conclusions on the responses to the questions about education (the

multiple choice answers were: high school education, college degree,

bachelor degree, master degree or other). As per Nancy Adler (p.52-54), in

individualistic societies, companies hire people based on their education and

professional skills, when in collectivistic societies, people often get hired

through contacts within the company (being a good friend or a family member

of a current employee of the company). Another criterion is the general rate

of responses on the questionnaire. In collectivistic societies, the rate of

responses will be high, because they are group-oriented and delegate the task

to the whole department, as well as it will take longer time to submit all the

answers, when in individualistic societies, the rate of responses will be low

and the answers will be submitted immediately.


1. Croatia

Picture 2. Croatia (http://geert-hofstede.com/croatia.html)

Power Distance (PDI): Croatia scores high on this dimension (score of 73).

Meaning that in the society hierarchical order is accepted and followed.

People have defined places in the social structure, which is applicable for the

organizations, which are often centralized. Management has high authority

and power in decision making and information distribution.

Individualism versus Collectivism (IND): Croatia, with a score of 33 is

considered a collectivistic society. This means that people built strong, long

term oriented relationships. The sense of belonging is cruise for society,

where the members of the group take responsibility and care for each other.

This is reflected in the organizations. The relationships are often family-like,

where all the benefits and punishments are equally shared by the employees.

Masculinity versus Femininity (MAS): Croatia scores 40 on this dimension and

is thus considered a relatively feminine society. This implies that people value

quality of life much higher than the career achievements. Meaning that

people would prefer quality time spent with family then long working hours

with higher pay. In feminine societies equal rights and social statuses are

being provided to all its members. In organizations this implies that

http://geert-hofstede.com/croatia.html


management position can be taken by both male and female and the salary

variation is not too high between management and staff. In feminine

organizations conflicts are solved by finding a compromise and a common

ground. In organizations there is a high concern for environment and

corporate social responsibility. Being better than others is not rewarded in any

way.

Uncertainty avoidance (UAI): Croatia scores 80 on this dimension and thus

has a very high preference for avoiding uncertainty. In high uncertainty

avoidance society traditions are being kept, innovations are often resisted.

People highly value security; they want to be sure about what is going to

happen tomorrow. For organizations this means that employees are retained

for long period and life time employment is possible. People like to follow

guidelines and clear instructions in their work, as well as don’t like to be in a

rush when making decisions. People rely on the bureaucracy.

Long term orientation (LTO): No scores available

2. Denmark

Picture 3.Denmark (http://geert-hofstede.com/denmark.html)

PDI: With a score of 18 points Denmark is at the very low end of this

dimension. This matches perfectly with what many foreigners in Denmark

express: Danes do not lead, they coach and employee autonomy is required.

Facts talk for themselves: Denmark has the highest out of 27 EU countries rate

of employee’s autonomy. Danes believe in social equality. In organizations

http://geert-hofstede.com/denmark.html


this is translated into very horizontal structures and rather familiar

relationships between professors and students in the universities, for

example.

IDV: Denmark, with a score of 74 is an Individualistic society. This implies that

people stand for themselves and their close family members only. A short talk

is enough, with no need to built strong deep relationships. Danes are known

for very direct communication style, which altogether makes it fairy easy to

start business.

MAS: Denmark scores 16 on this dimension and is therefore considered a

feminine society. This implies that people value quality of life much higher

than the career achievements. Meaning that people would prefer quality time

spent with family then long working hours with higher pay. In feminine

societies equal rights and social statuses are being provided to all its

members. In organizations this implies that management position can be

taken by both male and female and the salary variation is not too high

between management and staff. In feminine organizations conflicts are solved

by finding a compromise and a common ground. In organizations there is a

high concern for environment and corporate social responsibility. Being better

than others is not rewarded in any way.

UAI: With a score of 23 Denmark scores low on this dimension. This means

that Danes do not need their life to be highly structured and predictable.

People are adventurous and spontaneous, accepting changes and new things

coming into their lives. Denmark has a reputation in innovation and design.

For organizations this means that employees tend to switch jobs easily looking

for new challenges and companies tent to implement innovations both

technological and methodological.

LTO: The Danes score 46, making it a short term orientation culture, though

very close to the middle. This means that society has strong wish for

possessing and to keep us with the modern trends. People don’t have a

tendency to save up for future and are oriented on achieving quick results.


Leisure time is important. Focus in business and politics is mostly on what is

happening now, instead of in future.

3. Estonia

Picture 4.Estonia (http://geert-hofstede.com/estonia.html)

PDV: Estonia scores low on this dimension (40). In Estonia employees are

willing to have a manager, who includes them in decision making and allows

expressing opinions.

As Hofstere explained the current situation is Estonia: “Estonia has recently

passed the transition state, which means however that the older generation

and state organizations often demonstrate high PDI tendencies. The older

Soviet ways of thinking and relating to the world still remain and the boss-

subordinate relationship among Estonians is sometimes more hierarchical

than the score suggests.” (http://geert-hofstede.com/estonia.html)

IDV: Estonia is an individualistic country with a score of 60. This implies that

people stand for themselves and their close family members only.

Relationships have functional purpose. Communication style is very direct,

which altogether makes it fairly easy to start business.

MAS: At a score of 30, Estonia is a feminine country. This implies that people

value quality of life much higher than the career achievements. Meaning that

people would prefer quality time spent with family then long working hours

with higher pay. In feminine societies equal rights and social statuses are

being provided to all its members. In organizations this implies that

http://geert-hofstede.com/estonia.html



management position can be taken by both male and female and the salary

variation is not too high between management and staff. In feminine

organizations conflicts are solved by finding a compromise and a common

ground. In organizations there is a high concern for environment and

corporate social responsibility. Being better than others is not rewarded in any

way.

UAI: With a score of 60, Estonia has a high preference for avoiding

uncertainty. In high uncertainty avoidance society traditions are being kept,

innovations are often resisted. People highly value security; they want to be

sure about what is going to happen tomorrow. For organizations this means

that employees are retained for long period and life time employment is

possible. People like to follow guidelines and clear instructions in their work,

as well as don’t like to be in a rush when making decisions. People rely on the

bureaucracy.

LTO: No scores available

4. Finland

Picture 5. Finland (http://geert-hofstede.com/finland.html)

PDI: Finland scores low on this dimension (score of 33). This means that the

society is equal; hierarchy is used for convenience only. In organization this

means that employees can approach their managers easily. Employees are

included in decision making process. The structure of organizations is

horizontal.

http://geert-hofstede.com/finland.html


IDV: Finland, with a score of 63 is an Individualistic society. This implies that




MAS: Finland scores 26 on this dimension and is thus considered a feminine

society. This implies that people value quality of life much higher than the

career achievements. Meaning that people would prefer quality time spent

with family then long working hours with higher pay. In feminine societies

equal rights and social statuses are being provided to all its members. In

organizations this implies that management position can be taken by both

male and female and the salary variation is not too high between

management and staff. In feminine organizations conflicts are solved by

finding a compromise and a common ground. In organizations there is a high

concern for environment and corporate social responsibility. Being better


UAI: Finland scores 59 on this dimension and thus has a medium high

preference for avoiding uncertainty. In high uncertainty avoidance society

traditions are being kept, innovations are often resisted. People highly value

security; they want to be sure about what is going to happen tomorrow. For

organizations this means that employees are retained for long period and life

time employment is possible. People like to follow guidelines and clear

instructions in their work, as well as don’t like to be in a rush when making

decisions. People rely on the bureaucracy.

LTO: The Finns score 45, making it a short term orientation culture. This

means that society has strong wish for possessing and to keep us with the

modern trends. People don’t have a tendency to save up for future and are

oriented on achieving quick results. Leisure time is important. Focus in

business and politics is mostly on what is happening now, instead of in future.


5. Hungary

Picture 6.Hungry (http://geert-hofstede.com/hungary.html)

PDI: Hungary scores low on this dimension (score of 46). This means that the




horizontal.

IDV: Hungary, with a score of 80 is an Individualistic society. This implies that




MAS: Hungary scores 88 on this dimension and is thus a masculine society.

This means that people live in order to work. The emphasis is on

achievements and career growth. In organizations within masculine societies,

manager is supposed to be decisive, high focus is on equity, fighting

competition and results. When conflicts arise, they are usually solved by

fighting them out.

UAI: Hungary scores 82 on this dimension and thus has a preference for

avoiding uncertainty. In high uncertainty avoidance society traditions are

http://geert-hofstede.com/hungary.html


being kept, innovations are often resisted. People highly value security; they

want to be sure about what is going to happen tomorrow. For organizations

this means that employees are retained for long period and life time

employment is possible. People like to follow guidelines and clear instructions

in their work, as well as don’t like to be in a rush when making decisions.

People rely on the bureaucracy.

LTO: Hungary scores 50, making it a long term orientation culture. The long

term oriented culture has a focus on the future results. People tend to save

and invest. Organizations choose a long term strategy, which will bring the

most benefits to a company in a long run.

6. Norway

Picture 7. Norway (http://geert-hofstede.com/norway.html)

PDI: Norway scores low on this dimension (31). This means that the society is

equal; hierarchy is used for convenience only. In organization this means that

employees can approach their managers easily. Employees are included in

decision making process. The structure of organizations is horizontal.

IDV: Norway with a score of 69 is considered an individualistic society. This

implies that people stand for themselves and their close family members only.



MAS: Norway scores 8 and is thus the second most feminine society. Finland

scores 26 on this dimension and is thus considered a feminine society. This

http://geert-hofstede.com/norway.html


implies that people value quality of life much higher than the career

achievements. Meaning that people would prefer quality time spent with

family then long working hours with higher pay. In feminine societies equal

rights and social statuses are being provided to all its members. In







UAI: Norway scores 50 and thus becomes a fairly pragmatic culture in terms

of uncertainty avoidance. This means that Norwegian society is exposed to

both ends of this dimension; thus having focus on planning and not being

afraid of taking risks at the same time.

LTO: Norway scores 44 making it more of a short term orientation culture.

This means that society has strong wish for possessing and to keep us with the




7. Poland

Picture 8. Poland (http://geert-hofstede.com/poland.html)

http://geert-hofstede.com/poland.html


PDI: At a score of 68, Poland is a hierarchical society. Meaning that in the

society hierarchical order is accepted and followed. People have defined

places in the social structure, which is applicable for the organizations, which

are often centralized. Management has high authority and power in decision

making and information distribution.

IDV: Poland, with a score of 60 is an Individualistic society. As Hofstede claims,

the high scores on PDI and IDV dimensions create a tension and contradiction

in this culture. The relationships are delicate, but very intense and fruitful

once you manage them. Managers in the organizations have to establish a

certain communication pattern- having a personal contact this everyone in the

organization, thus making everyone feel important, although not equal.

MAS: Poland scores 64 on this dimension and is thus a masculine society. This

means that people live in order to work. The emphasis is on achievements and

career growth. In organizations within masculine societies, manager is

supposed to be decisive, high focus is on equity, fighting competition and

results. When conflicts arise, they are usually solved by fighting them out.

UAI: Poland scores 92 on this dimension and thus has a very high preference

for avoiding uncertainty. In high uncertainty avoidance society traditions are







LTO: Poland scores 32, making it a short term orientation culture. This means

that society has strong wish for possessing and to keep us with the modern

trends. People don’t have a tendency to save up for future and are oriented

on achieving quick results. Leisure time is important. Focus in business and

politics is mostly on what is happening now, instead of in future.


8. Russia

Picture 9. Russia (http://geert-hofstede.com/russia.html)

PDI: Russia, scoring 93, is among the 10 percent of the most power distant

societies in the world. Meaning that in the society hierarchical order is

accepted and followed. People have defined places in the social structure,

which is applicable for the organizations, which are highly centralized.

Management has high authority and power in decision making and

information distribution.

This is underlined by the fact that the largest country in the world is extremely

centralized: 2/3 of all foreign investments go into Moscow where also 80% of

all financial potential is concentrated. This causes a huge discrepancy between

social layers- creating space large difference between the rich and the poor.

This makes the status symbols very important attributes.

IDV: Russia scores 39 and thus is a collectivistic society. Family and friends are

extremely important in everyday life. The relationships are carefully built and

often last live-long. Interpersonal communication, mutual trust and respect

are core values for making business and successful negotiations. Highly

http://geert-hofstede.com/russia.html


collectivistic society is also described as particularistic, meaning that rules and

laws are perceived in the context of a particular situation. For example,

people would not witness in the court against their family member or friend,

even knowing he/she is guilty.

MAS: As per Hofstede, Russia’s relatively low score of 36 may surprise with

regard to its preference for status symbols, but these are in Russia related to

the high Power Distance. Having a closer look, we can notice, that the work

place, for example, Russians tent to talk modestly, understate their status and

achievements. It is very unpopular to brag about your successes. While the

superiority of the boss is accepted, it is not appreciated among the co-

workers. In feminine societies, people value quality of life, and take care of

each other.

UAI: As per Hostede`s research, Scoring 95 Russians feel very much

threatened by ambiguous situations, as well as they have established one of

the most complex bureaucracies in the world. When applied to the business

world, people prefer to have lot f background information about each other

before starting a meetings or negotiations.

LTO: No score available

9. Slovenia

Picture 10. Slovenia (http://geert-hofstede.com/slovenia.html)

PDI: Slovenia scores high on this dimension (score of 71). Meaning that in the

society hierarchical order is accepted and followed. People have defined

http://geert-hofstede.com/slovenia.html


places in the social structure, which is applicable for the organizations, which

are often centralized. Management has high authority and power in decision

making and information distribution.

IDV: Slovenia, with a score of 27 is considered a collectivistic society. This

means that people built strong, long term oriented relationships. The sense of

belonging is cruise for society, where the members of the group take

responsibility and care for each other. This is reflected in the organizations.

The relationships are often family-like, where all the benefits and

punishments are equally shared by the employees.

MAS: Slovenia scores 19 on this dimension and is thus considered a feminine











UAI: Slovenia scores 88 on this dimension and thus has a very high preference

for avoiding uncertainty. In high uncertainty avoidance society traditions are







LTO: No scores available


10. Sweden

Picture 11. Sweden (http://geert-hofstede.com/sweden.html)

PDI: Sweden scores low on this dimension (score of 31). This means that the




horizontal.

IDV: Sweden, with a score of 71 is an Individualistic society. This implies that




MAS: Sweden scores 5 on this dimension and is therefore the most feminine






http://geert-hofstede.com/sweden.html







UAI: Sweden scores 29 on this dimension and thus has a low preference for

avoiding uncertainty. . This means that Swedes do not need their life to be

highly structured and predictable. People are adventurous and spontaneous,

accepting changes and new things coming into their lives. For organizations

this means that employees tend to switch jobs easily looking for new

challenges and companies tent to implement innovations both technological

and methodological.

LTO: The Swedes score 20, making it a short term orientation culture. This

means that society has strong wish for possessing and to keep us with the




Data analysisHaving described and categorized 10 out of 16 counties in MSC- SH using

Hofstede`s methods and theory, we will look into the data, which we have

submitted from the employees of the company. We will look at the way MSC

establishes a common corporate culture through the organizational goal and

associated criteria used for employee recruitment and selection; characterize

within two cultural dimensions- Collectivism versus Individualism and

Masculinity versus Femininity each country, including the ones, not covered

by Hofstede; and comparing our results with Hofstede`s results for countries

included in his research.

Collectivism versus individualism


As per Nancy Adler (2010) and article of Timothy Johnson “Respondent

Cultural Orientations and survey participation: the effect of Individualism and

Collectivism”, this dimension affects directly the non-response rate of the

surveys. Members of individualistic societies are often not willing to

participate in surveys (Adler, 2010). The reason for low responsiveness is the

little personal benefit that can be extracted from completing surveys, as it is

mostly seen as being time-consuming and irrelevant for the individual. On the

other hand, collectivist societies have higher rate of response, as this process

emphasizes cooperation and personal sacrifice (of time) for greater social

good. In our study we have used this indicator of Individualistic versus

Collectivistic dimension, to evaluate, according to it, the real life case-

counties within MSC Scandinavia Holding. We have sent out a survey to 755

employees in 16 countries- which are all MSC Scandinavia Holding staff. The

overall responses we have obtained are 261, which is 35 percent (see

Appendix 3). We have submitted the response amount per country and

compared with the number of employees in each office to calculate the

response rate. We have illustrated the results in the Graph 1 below. The graph

shows, that none of the countries has completed the survey with 100 percent

rate of responsiveness; however, the highest result stands for MSC Denmark,

where 47 out of 64 people completed the questionnaire. The lowest response

rate belongs to MSC Croatia, where only 1 out of 17 people filled in the

survey. The rates of responses of other countries vary from 71 to 14 percent.

We do not state strongly which dimension each of the countries belongs to, as

this single parameter does not provide sufficient evidence; however, we have

chosen to use the 50 percent as a cutting line; the countries with rate of

response below 50 percent are more likely to be individualistic, and countries

above 50 percent are more likely to be collectivistic.

To be more specific, according to the assumption made above, we define

Croatia, Finland, Russia, Poland and Slovenia as individualistic countries. Such

results are dramatically different from what we expected. Out of ten


countries, studied by G. Hofstede, only 3 were classified as collectivistic-

Russia, Croatia and Slovenia; and these were the countries, with the lowest

response rates, whereas we have expected much higher involvement of

people in these MSC- SH offices. However, the results for Finland and Poland

confirmed Hofstede`s classification.

Further on, we suggest that the following countries are more individualistic

then collectivistic: Belarus, Hungary, and Estonia. The rate of responsiveness

in these offices is higher than 30 percent, but still below 50 percent cutting

line. Thus Estonia and Hungary matching Hofstede`s description.

Furthermore, the results of our survey showed that Kazakhstan and Denmark

act as collectivistic cultures, performing the highest rate of responsiveness out

of all offices. Remaining Bosnia- Herzegovina, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway,

Sweden and Uzbekistan we characterize as being more collectivistic than

individualistic, as the rates of responsiveness range in the percentage interval

from 52 to 57.

Thus we conclude, that our results for Scandinavian countries- Denmark,

Norway and Sweden deviate from Hofstede`s results. Surprisingly, employees

in these offices showed enthusiasm to participate in our research.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

38%

57%

6%

73%

38%

14%

47%

71%

53%

52%

56%

19%16%

27%

55%56%

Country, X

Indi

vidu

alism

Colle

ctivi

sm, Y


Graph 1. Rates of responsiveness per country.

Masculinity versus femininity

According to Hofstede and Hofstede 2005, Masculinity versus Femininity

dimension has significant influence on the business world and organizational

structure in terms of female`s chances and opportunities in career and the

probability of them climbing up the hierarchical ladder in the company. We

have analyzed MSC- SH countries from the perspective of male and female

management ratio in the company`s local offices. We have combined two

questions from the survey to achieve the results, which we have submitted in

Graph 2. It represents the percentage ratio of men and women in each

country (see Appendix 4). The presence of females on the managing positions

in the company indicates that the male and female roles in the society are not

strictly defined, meaning that women are encouraged to have higher

education and have as many growth and carrier opportunities as men. This

can be observed in feminine societies, which value equality of its` members

and quality of life.

Some of the results shown in the Graph 2 were expected, whereas, some

were surprising. Unfortunately we do not have any data on this subject for

Croatia and Uzbekistan, as none of the managers from these countries have

completed the survey. We also cannot make any judgments about the

countries with one male manager. The fact that the manager is male does not

imply that a female did not have the same chance of getting this position; it

might have been a coincidence, meaning that, this evidence is insufficient to

claim, that the given culture is more likely to be masculine. Such countries are

Belarus and Bosnia- Herzegovina.


The results were surprising for Scandinavian countries: Sweden and Denmark,

which, as per Hofstede, are the world`s most feminine cultures, in our

research appeared to have a big superiority of males over females in the

managing positions in the company. The ratios are 5:2 for Sweden and 14:2

for Denmark respectively. Another surprising country is Russia. Hofstede

argued that, even though Russia seems to be a masculine society, due to a

very hierarchical structure of organizations and society itself, it is a feminine

culture. Strict hierarchy is a cause of extremely high power distance in this

country and not due to the masculine nature. However, the results of our

survey show that in Russian organizations, managing positions are still

principally occupied by males- the ratio is 8:2 respectively. The survey results

for Slovenia also revealed the preference for male managers in given

company- 3:1 ratio of male versus female managers respectively, thus

conflicting with Hofstede`s description of Slovenia as feminine country.

Our study has confirmed Hofstede`s classification of Poland and Hungary as

masculine cultures as we can observe a strong preference for male managers

with male versus female ratio as 2:0 and 3:0 respectively. Another country,

which shows to be more masculine, according to our results for this

dimension, is Lithuania. The male and female manager ratio is 2:1 respectively

(giving the percentage gap of 34).

On the other hand, as strongly feminine cultures in our research appeared to

be Estonia, Finland and Kazakhstan with male versus female managers ratios

of 2:4, 0:1 and 2:2 respectively; thus our results for Estonia and Finland

matched Hofstede`s classification of these countries as feminine. The results

for Kazakhstan might seem unexpected for many people, as the stereotype

about Eastern countries usually defines them as having very traditional roles

for genders in society. However, we, according to the analysis from the

conducted survey, suggest that Kazakhstan is more likely to have a feminine

nature of the society.


Another group of countries, which we examined, seem to have alike patterns

of male and female distribution on managing positions- they are Norway and

Latvia. In the MSC offices in these countries both males and females represent

managing positions in the company with insignificant prevalence of men. We

suggest that these 3 countries are more likely to be feminine. Even though,

the percentage gap exists, it is considered to be rather small (14 percent in

Latvia and 20 percent in Norway), given that, according to Forbes, statistics

for labor force in general and for women in management particularly, still

does not show the 50:50 ratio of men and women engagement in the job

market, especially inequality, in favor of men, is observable on the higher top

management positions and in the board of directors

(http://www.forbes.com/2011/02/18/women-business-management-forbes-woman-

leadership-corporate-boards.html).

Belarus

Bosnia- Herzegovina

Croatia

Denmark

Estonia

Finland

Hungary

Kazakhstan

Latvia

Lithuania

Norway

Poland

Russia

Slovenia

Sweden

Uzbekistan

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%100%

100%

0%

86%

33%

0%

100%

50%

57%

67%

60%

100%

80%

75%

71%

0%

0%

0%0%

14%67%

100%

0%

50%

43%33%

40%

0%

20%

25%

29%0%

Fem_Manager Male_Manager

http://www.forbes.com/2011/02/18/women-business-management-forbes-woman-leadership-corporate-boards.html



Graph 2. Male versus Female manager ratio per county

In conclusion for data analysis of cultural dimensions, we want to point out

and summarize the results for those six countries, which are not covered by

Hofstede (see Appendix 5):

- Belarus: is classified as more individualistic than collectivistic culture,

with insufficient data to characterize Masculinity versus Femininity

dimension;

- Bosnia- Herzegovina is classified as more collectivistic than

individualistic culture, with insufficient data to characterize Masculinity

versus Femininity dimension;

- Kazakhstan is classified as collectivistic and feminine culture;

- Latvia is classified as more collectivistic than individualistic culture, and

more likely to be feminine;

- Lithuania is classified as more collectivistic than individualistic culture,

and more likely to be masculine;

- Uzbekistan is classified as more collectivistic than individualistic

culture, with insufficient data to characterize Masculinity versus

Femininity dimension.

Our results reflect the comparison of all countries with each other from

the common picture of responses to a relevant question. We did not score

each dimension, as did Hofstede, using a common scale, therefore, we

often formulated our conclusions as “more or less likely” to be placed on

one or another side of two cultural dimensions we described.

MSC organization culture through employee recruiting and retaining

Our angle to look at MSC- SH organizational culture is aimed at mapping and

comparing the criteria for recruiting staff in each office of MSC- SH across 16


participant countries. Our analysis will be rooted into defining the most

average pattern of characteristics of individual within MSC – SH and

comparing it to the average pattern of personal characteristics of employee in

every, out of 16 MSC- SH regional offices.

Starting with the characteristics of an average employee in MSC- SH (see

Appendix 6) we can conclude that its` representative is a

Female, which scores 54 percent out of all respondents:

Picture 12. Gender ratio

An employee of age from 20-30 years (51 percent)

Picture 13. Age groups ratio

Single (64 percent)

Picture 14. Family status ratio

With a bachelor degree (41 percent)


Picture 15. Education degree ratio

Working in MSC on average 1-5 years (49 percent)

Picture 16. Years of experience in MSC ratio

Having defined the average characteristics of an MSC- SH employee, our

objective is to illustrate the dispersion of these characteristics across every

country. As our questionnaire was structured, meaning that respondents had

fixed options of answers, we were not able to calculate the numerical mean

for every answer. Therefore we chose to refer to the most popular response

option of every question from each respondent country and mapped it on the

graph below. We have compared the employees from each country across

five characteristics: gender, age, family status, education and years of working

in MSC. On the graph we have presented below, we have coded the results in

the following way: by selecting the most popular answer to every question in

the respondent countries. The question about gender had two possible

answers: 1- for male, 2- for female; question of age had six possible answers:

1- under 20 years, 2- from 20 to 30 years, 3- from 30 to 40 years, 4- from 40 to

50 years, 5- from 50 to 60 years, 6- over 60 years. The question about the


family status suggested two possibilities: 1- married, 2- not marries. There

were five optional answers for education: 1- high school degree, 2- college

degree, 3- bachelor degree, 4- master degree, 5- other type of education

(might be a PhD degree or any kind of specialized professional education).

And, finally, the question on years of experience in MSC had 4 possible

answers: 1- from 0 to 1 year, 2- from 1 till 5 years, 3- from 5 till 10 years, 4-

over 10 years. According to the above mentioned coding (see Appendix 7) the

results are summarized in the graph below.

Gender Age Family status Education Experience in MSC0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Belarus Bosnia- Herzegovina Croatia DenmarkEstonia Finland Hungary KazakhstanLatvia Lithuania Norway PolandRussia Slovenia Sweden UzbekistanMSC Average

Graph 3. Survey results per country

In the graph every country is represented in different color in the following

sequence: MSC Average employee, Belarus, Bosnia- Herzegovina, Croatia,

Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway,

Poland, Russia, Slovenia, Sweden and Uzbekistan. Every question on the X axis

in the graph submits all the results per each country, thus visualizing the

dispersion of the results.


Referring to question of gender, the results of MSC- SH, as a single unit,

showed that the number of men and women in the company is almost the

same- 46 versus 54 percent respectively. However, the countries, where men

prevail are Bosnia- Herzegovina, Croatia, Denmark, Lithuania, Norway, Poland

and Slovenia. Sweden scores 1.5 points in this question, due to the fact that

the amount of males and females in the office is the same.

As mentioned before, the most common age category in MSC-SH is the range

of 20-30 years. The results for this question appeared to be significantly

different for five countries- Croatia, Kazakhstan, Denmark, Hungary and

Slovenia, where the most common age category is 30-40 years. Three

countries scored 2.5 in this scale, meaning the age categories of 20-30 years

and 30-40 years are the most common with the same percentage- 50 and 50

percent for Bosnia- Herzegovina, 33 and 33 percent for Finland and 50 versus

50 percent for Lithuania.

The results for the question about family status are very homogeneous across

all 16 countries- majority of employees are not married. The exceptions are

Belarus and Hungary, where most of the employees are married and

Uzbekistan, where the ratio of married and single employees is 50 and 50

percent.

The question of education showed that the majority of employees in MSC- SH

have a bachelor degree- 41percent. As illustrated on the graph, four countries

deviate from the common overall average- Denmark, Hungary, Poland and

Sweden. Across the employees in Denmark the dominating education level is

a college degree- 38 percent, whereas in Hungary and Sweden- it is high

school education, that prevails- 33 percent for Hungary and 39 percent for

Sweden respectively. Statistics for education level in Poland showed

dramatically different results out of all 16 MSC- SH countries. We observe that

the education criteria for employee hiring in MSC Poland is very high- 85

percent out of 13 respondents have a Master degree, whereas other 15


percent are bachelors, meaning that all the employees have a higher

education, which is remarkable.

Finally, the question on the employee retaining in MSC- SH- the results are

very homogeneous. The average in MSC- SH is from 1 to 5 years experience

within the company. The exceptions are Latvia and Slovenia. As per

information, provided by MSC- SH executives, Latvian office had a huge

expansion during the last year, which caused a need for new workforce,

consequently, hiring of new employees. This explains the low average results

on staying with MSC in Latvia. On the other hand, the Slovenian employees

have been working in MSC-SH for 5 to 10 years on average. This fact might

have been influenced by very high uncertainty avoidance of Slovenian culture,

which has been defined by Hofstede.

Conclusion

As globalization is expanding, multinational organizations are becoming more

similar, while the behavior of people within them is remaining culturaly

unique. According to Nancy J. Adler, many managers believe that strong

organizational culture can erase or diminish significantly the cultural

differences within the organizations. However, Hofstede in his study proved

that employees and managers bring their cultural background and ethnicity to

the workplace. National culture in his study explained more than 50 percent

of difference in attitudes and behaviors, which explained more than did

professional role, age, gender or race. The biggest difference between

national and organizational culture is that national culture is rooted in values

and is absorbed by person from very young age, thus is a given fact for

organization management, whereas organizational culture is rooted in

practices, therefore can be manageable to some extent.


The objective of our thesis was to define organizational culture of MSC and

national cultures within MSC Scandinavia Holding. We have looked at the

artifact- such as MSC yellow color, logos and offices design, and at the core

values of the company- Trust, Responsibility, Common Sense, Enthusiasm,

Teamwork, Results. These core values are highly emphasized on all levels of

the company in all areas of activity- on employee and top management levels,

in internal cooperation, in communication with customers and suppliers.

According to Lars Funding, MSC Scandinavia Holding CEO, these core values

are the main mechanism for establishing a common corporate culture in all

MSC offices worldwide (see Appendix 2). From his words, given that in all

countries- both employees and managers “live by” this notion, managing

cultural differences is becoming much easier. Secondly, we have described

each country in MSC- SH based on Hofstede (data for only 10 countries out of

16 was available in his study). Parallel with that we have conducted our own

survey, which was aimed at defining the basic features of employees in MSC-

SH and find out if the selection of employees in this organization follow a

common trend across all countries. As according to G.Hofstede (2005) and

Nancy J. Adler (2010) pre-selection of employees play an important role in

maintaining organizations values, meaning through hiring people of certain

gender, age, nationality, and education. Another purpose of our survey was

to define, on our own, independently from Hofstede`s research, two out of

five cultural dimensions of the studied countries- Masculinity versus

Femininity and Individualism versus Collectivism, compare our results with

Hofstede`s and state them for countries, which he did not cover. According to

both Hofstede (2005) and Nancy Adler (2010) the certain factors and

behaviors of people point at belonging of the culture to one or another side of

the cultural dimension. For Individualism versus Collectivism it is the rate of

participation of people in the surveys and for Masculinity versus Femininity it

is the equality in labor force distribution, especially on management positions.


The results we have obtained for the Masculinity versus Femininity dimension

have not confirmed Hofstede`s theory for Denmark, Russia, Slovenia, Sweden,

whereas Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Norway, and Poland have matched.

Furthermore the data allowed us to define Kazakhstan as feminine culture,

Lithuania as more masculine culture and Latvia as more feminine.

The results we have submitted for the Individualism versus Collectivism

dimension have not confirmed Hofstede`s theory for Croatia, Denmark,

Norway, Russia, Slovenia and Sweden. Whereas, Estonia, Finland, Hungary

and Poland matched Hofstede`s classification. Furthermore, we have classified

Belarus as more individualistic culture, Bosnia- Herzegovina, Lithuania, Latvia

and Uzbekistan as more collectivistic and Kazakhstan as collectivistic.

As for data on selection and recruitment of employees, the obtained results

did not show the expected homogeneity. People in all 16 MSC – SH countries,

given their national differences, are not the same across such parameters as

age, gender, family status and education. This means that the HR department

in MSC – SH does not have a strong preference of a certain profile, when

hiring a person. According to the CEO Lars Funding, MSC supports diversity

and delegates lot of power and freedom to the local offices. This means that

the criteria for hiring staff is dictated by the local conditions of labor market

and local particularities of shipping industry in each country. MSC does admit

and realize the complexity of managing cultural differences, however sees

more benefits in cultural diversity, therefore company enhances it, instead of

trying to diminish. As Mr. Funding mentioned, the interaction of even polar

different cultures does not lead to problems, if people within the company

follow the corporate values- base their interaction on mutual trust and stay

responsible for their actions, and perceive themselves as a part of big MSC

family.


References

Aarhus School of Business and Social Science (2011), “ Organizational Behavior”, Second Custom addition

Adler, N. J. (1983) “Cross-cultural management research: The Ostrich and the

Trend”, the Academy of Management Review: 226-232

Adler, N.J and Gundersen A. (2010), “International Dimensions of

Organizational Behavior”, 5th edition, Thomson South-Western

Chapman, M. (1997), “Social Anthropology, Business Studies, and Cultural

Issues” International Studies of Management and Organization: 3-29

Dr. Chitakornkijsil P. (2010), “Intercultural Communication Challenges and

Multinational Organization Communication”: National Institute of

Development Administration (NIDA), Bangkok 10240 Thailand.

Czinkota, M. R., Ronkainen, I. A. and Moffet, M. H. (2005), “International

Business”, Mason: South Western

Hofstede, G. H. (2001), “Culture's consequences: comparing values, behaviors,

institutions, and organizations across nations”. London: Sage,

Hofstede, G. and Hofstede, G. J. (2004), “Cultures and Organizations: Software

of the Mind”. London: McGraw-Hill

Hofstede, G. H. (1994), “The business of international business is culture”,

International Business Review: 1-14


Johnson T. (2000), “Respondent Cultural Orientation and Survey Participation:

The Effect of Individualism and Collectivism”, University of Illinois at Chicago,

USA

Kostova, T. (1999), “Transnational transfer of strategic organizational

practices: A contextual perspective” Academy of Management Review: 308-

324

Pagell, M.; Katz, J.P. and Sheu, C. (2005), “The importance of national culture

in operations management research”, International Journal of Operations and

Production Management: 371-394

Scheffknecht S. (2011), “Multinational Enterprises- Organizational Culture VS.

National Culture”, International Journal of Management cases.

Tosi, H. L., Mero N. P. and Rizzo, J.R. (2000),” Managing Organizational

Culture” Blackwell: Oxford

Trompenaars, F. (1994), “Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding

Diversity in Global Business”, New York: McGraw-Hill

Links

http://www.amstat.org/sections/srms/proceedings/papers/2000_161.pdf

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-10/freight-rates-poised-to-

tumble-as-35-mile-line-of-ships-passes-coal-demand.html

http://www.forbes.com/2011/02/18/women-business-management-forbes-

woman-leadership-corporate-boards.html





http://www.amstat.org/sections/srms/proceedings/papers/2000_161.pdf





http://geert-hofstede.com/finland.html)








http://www.inspireimagineinnovate.com/PDF/GLOBEsummary-by-Michael-H-

Hoppe.pdf


http://www.marisec.org/shippingfacts/worldtrade/top-ten-container-

operators.php






http://www.inspireimagineinnovate.com/PDF/GLOBEsummary-by-Michael-H-Hoppe.pdf

http://www.inspireimagineinnovate.com/PDF/GLOBEsummary-by-Michael-H-Hoppe.pdf








http://geert-hofstede.com/finland.html





Appendices

Appendix 1. Questionairre

1. MSC Office

2. Gender

3. Age

4. Education

5. Family status

6. Manager/ employee

7. Years of work in MSC

Appendix 2. Interview with the CEO Lars Funding

1. How does MSC –SH (as being a multinational organization) handles the

challenge of cultural differences among offices on management and

employee level?

Mr. Aponte delegates a lot of power to the region meaning we can apply our

own culture as long as it is based on mutual trust and adherence to global

policies.

2. Which advantages/ disadvantages of cultural diversity can you name, in

our particular case?

Advantage: diversification more solutions to same problem, easy adjust local

market condition as we respect local cultures.

Disadvantage: mainly on communication which is difficult.

3. Which measures does MSC –SH headquarters undertake in order to

establish a common organization culture across all 16 local offices?


We do respect local cultures and delegate a lot of power to the countries.

In our region our management is based on our 6 core values which we all have

to live by. An important part of all holding managers are to wave the flag and

show our basic values in everything we do.

4. Can you mention any negative consequences from the misunderstandings

based on cultural differences in MSC- SH?

We base a lot on verbal agreements which can be dangerous and lead to

mistakes. Better to get everything in writing.

5. You have probably visited every MSC –SH office. Do the general

atmosphere/ spirit differ a lot in all 16 countries? Is staff mostly

homogeneous?

You see our basic values in all offices for sure. But you see cultural differences

of course.


Appendix 3. Rate of responsiveness

MSC Office№ of employees

№ of responces Rate of employees

Belarus 8 3 38%Bosnia- Herzegovina 7 4 57%Croatia 17 1 6%Denmark 64 47 73%Estonia 24 9 38%Finland 63 9 14%Hungary 19 9 47%Kazakhstan 7 5 71%Latvia 70 37 53%Lithuania 23 12 52%Norway 41 23 56%Poland 68 13 19%Russia 237 37 16%Slovenia 22 6 27%Sweden 74 41 55%Uzbekistan 9 5 56%TOTAL 753 261 35%


Appendix 4. Male versus Female manager ratio

MSC OfficeMale_Manager

Fem_Manager Total

Male_Manager

Fem_Manager

Belarus 1 0 1 100% 0%Bosnia- Herzegovina 1 0 1 100% 0%Croatia 0 0 0 0% 0%Denmark 12 2 14 86% 14%Estonia 2 4 6 33% 67%Finland 0 1 1 0% 100%Hungary 3 0 3 100% 0%Kazakhstan 2 2 4 50% 50%Latvia 4 3 7 57% 43%Lithuania 2 1 3 67% 33%Norway 3 2 5 60% 40%Poland 2 0 2 100% 0%Russia 8 2 10 80% 20%Slovenia 3 1 4 75% 25%Sweden 5 2 7 71% 29%Uzbekistan 0 0 0 0% 0%


Appendix 5. Summary of Hofstede`s classification

Country/ Dimension Power Distance Individualism/

CollectivismMasculinity/ Femininity

Uncertainty avoidance

Long term Orientation

Croatia high collectivistic feminine highno data

availableDenmark low individualistic feminine low short term

Estonia low individualistic feminine highno data

available

Finland low individualistic femininemedium

high short term Hungary low individualistic masculine high long termNorway low individualistic feminine medium short term Poland high individualistic masculine very high short term

Russia very high collectivistic feminine very highno data

available

Slovenia high collectivistic feminine very highno data

availableSweden low individualistic feminine low short term


The results of survey

Country/ Dimension

Our survey results on

individualism

Our survey results on

masculinity

Croatia individualist can`t defineDenmark collectivist more masculineEstonia more individualist feminineFinland individualist feminineHungary more individualist masculineNorway collectivist more femininePoland individualist masculineRussia individualist masculineSlovenia individualist more masculineSweden collectivist more masculineUzbekistan more collectivist can`t defineKazakhstan collectivist feminineLatvia more collectivist more feminineLithuania more collectivist more masculineBosnia more collectivist can`t defineBelarus more individualist can`t define


Appendix 6. Qualtrics Report

Initial Report

Last Modified: 04/29/2012

1. MSC-SH office:

# Answer Response %

1 Belarus 3 1%

2 Bosnia-Herzegovina 4 2%

3 Croatia 1 0%

4 Denmark 47 18%

5 Estonia 9 3%

6 Finland 9 3%

7 Hungary 9 3%

8 Kazakhstan 5 2%

9 Latvia 37 14%

10 Lithuania 12 5%

11 Norway 23 9%

12 Poland 13 5%

13 Russia 37 14%

14 Slovenia 6 2%

15 Sweden 41 16%

16 Uzbekistan 5 2%

Total 261 100%

2. Gender:

# Answer Response %

1 Male 122 46%

2 Female 142 54%

Total 264 100%


3. Age:

# Answer Response %

1 Under 20 2 1%

2 20-30 134 50%

3 30-40 87 33%

4 40-50 29 11%

5 50-60 13 5%

6 Over 60 1 0%

Total 266 100%

4. Position:

# Answer Response %

1 Employee 196 74%

2 Manager 70 26%

Total 266 100%

5. Family status:

# Answer Response %

1 Married 94 36%

2 Not married 170 64%

Total 264 100%

6. Education:

# Answer Response %

1 High School 43 16%

2 College degree 43 16%

3 Bachelor degree 110 41%

4 Master degree 59 22%

5 Other 11 4%

Total 266 100%


7. Years of experience in MSC:

# Answer Response %

1 0-1 year 53 20%

2 1-5 years 130 49%

3 5-10 59 22%

4 Over 10 years 23 9%

Total 265 100%


Appendix 7. Summary of all responses

MSC Office Gender AgeFamily status

Education

Experience in MSC

Belarus 2 2 1 3 2Bosnia- Herzegovina 1 2.5 2 3 2Croatia 1 3 2 3 2Denmark 1 3 2 2 2Estonia 2 2 2 3 2Finland 2 2.5 2 3 2Hungary 2 3 1 1 2.5Kazakhstan 2 3 2 3 2Latvia 2 2 2 3 1Lithuania 1 2.5 2 3 2Norway 1 2 2 3 2Poland 1 2 2 4 2Russia 2 2 2 3 2Slovenia 1 3 2 3 3Sweden 1.5 2 2 1 2Uzbekistan 2 2 1.5 3 2MSC Average 2 2 2 3 2

introduction - au purepure.au.dk/portal/files/45283948/jo86695_ac86281.php.… · web...

Documents