Are we Debbie Downers when analyzing cultural differences in cross-cultural management research?
That is, do we look at the negative side of these differences over the positive to our own detriment?
That’s what researchers for this paper determined.
Authoring, “The upside of cultural differences: Towards a more balanced treatment of culture in cross-cultural management research,” the team of researchers encouraged scholars to “explore how cultural diversity, distance, and foreignness create value for global organizations.”
And this is what they discovered.
The State of Cross-Cultural Management Literature Today
More often than not, CCM literature looks at the negative when discussing differences in culture and management.
The paper highlights regularly used terms in such research, like “foreignness,” “cultural distance,” and “cultural misfit,” saying they reflect this emphasis on the negative.
These terms suggest incompatibility, conflict, and friction.
To counter this, the authors suggest an emphasis on the upside of cultural differences, instead seeking the “positive role of distance and diversity across national, cultural, institutional, and organizational dimensions.”
Endeavoring to seek out the positive, they argue, will balance the treatment of culture in CCM research, the goal being to leverage the benefits and positive dynamics of cultural differences in various contexts.
So, how does one do this exactly?
International and global businesses reap the benefits of cross-cultural labor and management, so the authors suggest the focus in CCM research and literature can be placed on those benefits.
A Double-Edged Sword
One example outlined in the paper is the following research submission:
Pesch and Bouncken’s paper, “The double-edged sword of cultural distance in international alliances,” shows how examining positive outcomes of cross-border interactions can benefit international businesses.
Their findings suggest that the positive effects of cultural differences involving knowledge combination and task discourse outweigh any issues with trust-building that can occur by perceived distance.
Moreover, cross-border alliances lead to improved innovation and joint product development.
The research submission clarifies that these positive effects occur mainly in non-equity alliances, whereas M&As or joint ventures might run into more cross-cultural conflict, due to communication issues and social categorization processes.
Still, the above benefits are often overlooked in CCM research.
The authors conclude:
“Explicitly considering positive phenomena can help better understand when and how cultural diversity, distance, and foreignness can enhance organizational effectiveness and performance at multiple levels.”
The paper also took a look at Hyun-Jung Lee’s interview with renowned cognitive social psychologist, Richard Nisbett, who authored The Geography of Thought.
We’ll dive into that next week.