Managing people in a cross-cultural context

Résumé du document

My company, REN, is a small company headquartered in Copenhagen. It is a new Japanese owned event company. It employs 50 people. The company has experienced problems with team building during its previous events because of the multinational nature of the teams. The cultural factor had not been well anticipated which can now lead to the failure of the development of REN. For a new event, it has planned to have a team of 11 working on the event. The manager is Japanese. The majority of the team is Dutch, the rest are Japanese. For this new event, the company wants to solve the problem in order to make the company more efficient. This report has objectives to provide some recommendations about the team building policy in a cross cultural context which have to be adopted by REN to avoid team building problems and make its teams more efficient.

Extraits

[...] Thomson, R (1997) Managing People. Institute of Management Foundation. Butterworth Heinemann Ltd. Thomson, R. & Mabey, C. (1994). Developing Human Ressources. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd. Woodcock, M. (1979). Team Development Manual. [...]

[...] It recommends that: All team members should receive training in cross-cultural awareness. Manager must conduct a survey on work values, strength and weaknesses of Japanese and Dutch members. They must use this survey plus the main theories of this topic to set up a management style which will be the most efficient. Setting up a process of acculturation to integrate the Japanese culture in the Netherland culture. It must be supported by the design of a new company culture which takes into account both cultures. [...]

[...] Bennett (1991, p 154) defines a team as: special sort of group . The defining characteristic of a team is that its members voluntarily co-ordinate their work in order to achieve group objectives.' But as Thomson & Mabey (1994, p 165) add, a team is also small number of people with complementary skills” Why do organizations create formal work groups? Handy (1993, p 151 has summarised the main reasons which push organizations creating formal work groups: To accomplish a particular duty; To manage and control the work; To find a solution to a problem; To pass on decisions or information to those who need to know; To collect information and ideas; To test the validity and ratify a decision taken outside the group; To co-ordinate problems and tasks between functions or divisions; To allow and encourage individuals to get involved in the plans and activities of the organization; To resolve dispute; To inquest into the past. [...]

[...] Aldershot: Gower Press Teakfield Limited. [...]

[...] This goes by knowing the Tuckman's four stages of group development: Forming: Individuals test each other and look for their role in the team. Relationships tend to be formal, cautious and members try to show only their strong points. Decisions are often based on the leader's initiatives and group members try to match the leader's expectations. Storming Members feel more confident to express their own ideas and feelings. There may be disagreements which may lead to conflict. But members may listen more to others' ideas. Norming The group starts to develop a group culture. [...]