Cross Cultural Management

This report assesses the impact of national culture on business processes and examines the similarities and differences in managerial processes and organizational culture in Australia and Sri Lanka. It uses Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory to analyze communication, decision making, managing teams, and leadership styles.

Running Head: CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT
Cross Cultural Management

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 1
Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................2
Impact of National Culture on the Business Processes...................................................................2
Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory..............................................................................................2
Power Distance............................................................................................................................3
Individualism versus Collectivism (Group Orientation)..............................................................4
Masculinity Versus Femininity....................................................................................................4
Uncertainty Avoidance................................................................................................................5
Long Term Orientation................................................................................................................5
Similarity and Differences in Managerial Processes and Organizational Culture in Australia and
Sri Lanka..........................................................................................................................................6
Communication and Negotiation Styles......................................................................................6
Decision Making..........................................................................................................................7
Managing Teams..........................................................................................................................7
Autocratic Versus Delegated Leadership.....................................................................................8
Superior- Subordinate Relationships...........................................................................................8
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................9
References......................................................................................................................................10

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 2
Introduction
Cross cultural management can be defined as overseeing employees or teams from other culture
or countries. Organizations have their offices in a number of countries which are managed by the
people in the head office (Barmeyer & Franklin 2016). Another scenario is related with the
immigration of people from different countries in order to get an appropriate job. Effectiveness
of the cross- cultural management can be ensured only when the manager identifies and
acknowledges the differences in practices, cultures and preferences of the members of the team.
Certain business systems or processes can be adapted or modified by the managers for the
purpose of improving the efficacy of the workforce (Araújo & Pestana,2017).
This report makes the assessment of the similarities and differences in the managerial processes
and organizational culture which can be encountered by an international manager during the
cross cultural working in Australia and Sri Lanka.
Impact of National Culture on the Business Processes
Culture can be defined as the norms and social behavior found in human societies. Culture is the
knowledge and characteristics of specific group of people, encompassing, religion, language,
social habits, cuisine, arts and music. The diverse practices of the business are greatly impacted
by the national culture. The cultural differences between different nations create a significant
impact on the behavior and thinking of the people (Kim & McLean 2014). Also, there are a lot of
similarities and differences between the organizational culture and managerial processes of two
countries. Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory has been used for the purpose of ascertaining
the impact of culture on the workplace of Australia and Sri Lanka. This theory also examines
various aspects such as such as impact of culture on communications, individualism versus group
orientation, managing teams and superior subordinate relationships.
Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 3
SRI LANKA Australia
Figure 1 Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions of Australia and Sri Lanka
(Source: Bakir et. al 2015)
Power Distance
This dimension is concerned with the fact that all the individuals are not equal in the society.
The term power distance can be defined as the degree to which organizations and members of
institutions having less power accept and except the unequal distribution of power. The score of
Australia is low in this dimension (36). This means that the organizations in Australia have
established hierarchy for convenience which implies that there is much reliance of the managers
on the individual employees and the superiors are also accessible for providing their guidance
and expertise (Jyoti & Kour 2015). Employees and managers both expect to be consulted while
making major decisions in the organization. The sharing of information is also very frequent.
The kind of communication adopted in Australian organizations is direct, informal and
participative. In Australia, the leadership style adopted by the managers is neither autocratic nor
delegated as the managers follow democratic leadership style.
On the other hand, Sri Lanka scores high in this dimension (80) and is therefore considered to be
a hierarchical society. The hierarchical order which provides a place for every person in the
organization is accepted by the people in Sri Lanka. Inherent inequalities are reflected by the
organization’s hierarchy where centralization is more popular (Rebelo 2017). The bosses are

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 4
required to tell their employees regarding the tasks to be done. The democratic leadership style is
adopted by the leaders in Sri Lanka.
Individualism versus Collectivism (Group Orientation)
This dimension addresses the issue relating to the extent to which independence is maintained
among its members by the society. Collectivism can be defined as a tightly knit framework
which is preferred by the society and the individuals expect that the individuals will be looked
after by their society in exchange of unquestioning loyalty (Thomas & Peterson 2017). The score
of Australia in this context is 90 which imply that it is a highly individualist culture. In other
words, it is a loosely- knit society in which people look after their immediate families and
themselves. In the organizational context, the employers expect the employees to display
initiative and be self- reliant. The recruitment and selection along with the promotional decisions
are taken on the basis of evidence or merit of the previously done work of the employee or his
capability (Purnell 2018).
As far as Sri Lanka is concerned, it is a collectivistic society as it has scored low in this
dimension (35). In a collectivist culture, loyalty is paramount and therefore it performs the
function of overriding other rules and regulations of the society. In such as society, offence leads
to loss of face and shame. Moral terms are linked with the employee/ employer relationships and
the promotional and hiring (recruitment and selection) decisions are taken on the basis of
employee’s in- group.
Masculinity Versus Femininity
A preference for assertiveness, achievement, heroism and material rewards for success in society
is represented by the masculinity side of this dimension. On the other hand, femininity represents
the preference for modesty, cooperation, quality of life and caring for the weak. Australia scores
61 in this dimension and therefore is considered among the masculine societies. The resolution
of conflicts is made at individual level and the ultimate goal to win is pursued (Warren 2017).
The successes and achievements are also celebrated by the Australians and are given prime
importance at the time of making recruitment and selection and promotion decisions in the
workplace. Equality is also very crucial in terms of gender roles (Kim et. al 2015). Both men and
women work in the same industries and hold same authorities. Culture shock can result from the

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 5
business performance by high- ranking women. Business ethics in Australia demands equal
treatments to people irrespective of their social standing (Mach & Baruch 2015).
Similarly, Sri Lanka is a feminine society with the low score of 10 in this dimension. Therefore,
Sri Lanka focuses on working in order to live. The working lives of the people are supported by
solidarity, quality and equality. Compromise and negotiation assist in resolving the conflicts in
the organization. Flexibility and free time are the incentives that are valued by the employees. Sri
Lanka has scored a low rank in terms of gender equality. Sri Lanka also faces issues relating to
low social rights and political participation (Cross & Payne 2018).
Uncertainty Avoidance
This dimension can be defined as the degree to which unknown and ambiguous situations crate a
threat for the members of a culture and therefore believe in making attempts for avoiding these
(Bakir et. al. 2015). The score of Australia in this dimension is 51which provides that
vulnerability is not given much preference in Australia. More tension and pressure is taken by
the individuals and require security for the jobs. The uncertainty avoidance level of Sri Lanka is
also similar but a little less as compared to that of Australia. The score is 45 in the Hofstede’s
dimension of culture analysis.
Long Term Orientation
This dimension is focused on the manner in which links with the past are maintained by the
society along with dealing with the challenges of the future and present. In this dimension,
Australia has scored 21 and therefore is considered to be a normative culture. The thinking of the
employees is also normative and they have strong concern regarding the establishment of
absolute truth. Traditions are given prime importance and the complete focus is on the
achievement of quick results. Business ethics in Australia means treating the customers and
employees in a fair and honest manner regarding its business practices (Fernando & Moore
2015).
On the other hand, Sri Lanka scores 45 in this dimension. The countries which score high in this
dimension are likely to make the adoption a business like strategy. This predicts that people take
measures and act in a careful manner in order to deal with the future. The score of Sri Lanka is

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 6
high in comparison to Australia and therefore it is often regarded as the not so strong culture as
far as long term orientation is concerned. Business ethics are maintained in the corporate culture
of the companies by way of embracing and promoting strong business principles and
professional ethics at each level (Kafetsios et. al 2018).
Indulgence versus Restraint- this dimension is focused on the degree to which the desires and
impulses are controlled by the people. Australia is an indulgent country as it has score high (71)
in this dimension. The people belonging to the societies which score in this dimension exhibit a
will for realizing their desires and impulses for having fun and enjoying the life. A positive
attitude is possessed by such people and has a tendency towards optimism. Also, leisure time is
of prime importance to such people as money is spend by them in accordance with their wish.
Similarity and Differences in Managerial Processes and Organizational Culture in
Australia and Sri Lanka
The managers of both the countries make the use of democratic leadership style for the purpose
of guiding the employees in the organization. The leaders from both the countries are supportive
and encourage participation of the employees in the process of decision making. Sri Lanka also
makes the use of other leadership styles such as autocratic and delegated leadership along with
democratic leadership for the purpose of managing and guiding the employees.
Communication and Negotiation Styles
Australians are considered to be transactional and they do not necessarily make business
introductions through an intermediary. At the same time, relationship building and networking
can act as the significant factor for the long term success of the Australian businesses (Kinloch &
Metge 2014). Within the industry, most senior level executives know each other. Australia has a
small population and the main aim of the people is to develop harmonious working relationships
as they have to work with the same person again and again. Cross cultural management should
be done by way of keeping this fact in mind. Direct communication is adopted by the
organizations with their employees along with a bit of humor (del Mar Miras‐ Rodríguez et. al.
2015).
On the other hand, in Sri Lanka, personal relationships are given prime importance while
conducting business. Respect and trust form the basis of the relationships. Perseverance, patience

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 7
and persistence is needed while establishing communication with the Sri Lankans. Therefore, it
can be concluded that the communication and the negotiation styles are similar in both the
countries (Christopher et. al. 2014).
Decision Making
Decision making in Australia is done after consulting the employees in the matters affecting
them. In this way, employees feel responsible for the success of the business and takes steps for
the execution of the instructions given by the manager. The organizations in Australia are also
guided by aggressiveness which results in quick thinking and fast decision making (Taylor
2018).
Decision making takes a lot of time in Sri Lanka and it is also difficult in ascertaining the actual
decision maker. There is still the existence of caste system in the hierarchical country like Sri
Lanka. Therefore, the managers speak to the employees in a kind manner. However, sometimes
the managers also criticize the employees publicly. This behavior should not be emulated by the
expatriate manager. The boss or manager is the ultimate authority in the organization and
therefore, is needed to be treated with deference and respect. Similarly, paternalistic behavior
and concern is expected from a manager for their employees. The boss is not challenged by the
employees even when wrong action is taken by him. Therefore, both the countries give
importance to their employees. The decision making pattern is not similar (Degens et. al 2017).
Managing Teams
Team management in Australia can be handled by the managers by way of recognizing and
valuing the specialized knowledge possessed by the employees. The managers need to consult
the employees while making major decisions for the greater good of the business. The managers
also need to be task oriented for the purpose of managing the staff and teams. The managers need
to harness the talent of the team and developing the resulting synergies.
In Sri Lanka, the teams are managed by the managers with the help of paternalistic attitude.
Professional concerns are also demonstrated by the managers for the teams. However, lower
ranking individuals of the teams are not consulted during the decision making process.
Therefore, there is a wide difference in the process of team management in both the countries
(French 2015).

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 8
Autocratic Versus Delegated Leadership
In Australia, the leadership style adopted by the managers is neither autocratic nor delegated as
the managers follow democratic leadership style. The organizations in Australia are also guided
by aggressiveness which results in quick thinking and fast decision making (Yahaya & Ebrahim
2016). The leaders in the organization are also very supportive and give preference to mentoring
and coaching instead of focusing on individual mistakes (Turner et. al 2016).
The democratic leadership style is adopted by the leaders in Sri Lanka. This style is also known
as participative leadership style and therefore involves greater participation of the members in
the process of decision making. There is free exchange and flow of ideas in the organization.
However, delegated leadership and autocratic leadership are also adopted by the managers in
accordance with the circumstances (Bird & Mendenhall 2016).
Superior- Subordinate Relationships
In Australia, participative and collaborative management style is adopted by the superiors.
Superiors expect the subordinates to work late and to even give up their weekends for the
purpose of meeting the deadlines. Intercultural management therefore requires the ability of the
individual to meet the deadlines.
In Sri Lanka, superiors do not consult the lower ranking subordinates while making the major
decisions of the organization. There is fluidity in timescales and deadlines in Sri Lanka. These
are required to be set well in advance in a careful manner (Lussier et. al 2016). These are
flexible and are not rigid as in the case of Australia which creates a difference between the two.
All these factors are significantly affected by the culture prevalent in Australia and Sri Lanka.
Cross cultural management needs to consider these factors while handling the business contexts.
Culture is always an important part which governs the business operations of every country.
other framework such as GLOBE’S nine dimensions of culture (such as assertiveness,
uncertainty avoidance, future orientation, power distance, gender differentiation, institutional
collectivism, human orientation, performance orientation, family/ in- group collectivism) and
Trompenaars’ seven dimensions of culture(such as universalism versus particularism, neutral
versus emotional, achievement versus ascription, individualism versus collectivism, specific
versus diffuse, attitude towards the environment and attitude towards time). The appropriate

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 9
application of these frameworks will provide the different styles of interaction and
communication that result from the cultural differences.
Conclusion
Therefore, it can be concluded that cross cultural management is concerned with overseeing
employees or teams from other culture or countries. This report assessed the similarities and
differences in the managerial processes and organizational culture which can be encountered by
an international manager during the cross cultural working in Australia and Sri Lanka.
Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory has been used for the purpose of ascertaining the impact of
culture on the workplace of Australia and Sri Lanka. This theory also examined various aspects
such as impact of culture on communications, individualism versus group orientation, managing
teams and superior subordinate relationships.
Direct communication is adopted by the organizations in Australia with their employees along
with a bit of humor while Sri Lanka gives prime importance to the personal relations during
business operations. Decision making in Australia is done after consulting the employees in the
context of the matters affecting them. Decision making takes a lot of time in Sri Lanka and it is
also difficult in ascertaining the actual decision maker. Team management in Australia can be
handled by the managers by way of recognizing and valuing the specialized knowledge
possessed by the employees. In Sri Lanka, the teams are managed by the managers with the help
of paternalistic attitude. In Australia, the leadership style adopted by the managers is neither
autocratic nor delegated as the managers follow democratic leadership style. Participative and
collaborative management style is adopted by the superiors for the subordinates. The democratic
leadership style is adopted by the leaders in Sri Lanka. Superiors do not consult the lower
ranking subordinates while making the major decisions of the organization. Therefore, the
communication and negotiation styles of both the countries are similar but decision making, team
management, leadership and superior subordinate relationships are different.

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 10
References
Araújo, J, & Pestana, G 2017. A framework for social well-being and skills management at the
workplace. International Journal of Information Management, vol. 37, no.6, 718-725.
Bakir, A, Blodgett, JG, Vitell, SJ, & Rose, G M 2015. A preliminary investigation of the
reliability and validity of Hofstede’s cross cultural dimensions. In Proceedings of the
2000 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference (pp. 226-232). Springer,
Cham.
Barmeyer, C, & Franklin, P 2016. Intercultural Management: a case-based approach to
achieving Complementarity and Synergy. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Bird, A, & Mendenhall, M E (2016). From cross-cultural management to global leadership:
Evolution and adaptation. Journal of World Business, vol. 51, no.1, 115-126.
Christopher, J C, Wendt, D C, Marecek, J, & Goodman, D M 2014. Critical cultural awareness:
Contributions to a globalizing psychology. American Psychologist, vol. 69, no.7, 645.
Cross, M, & Payne, G (2018). Work and the enterprise culture. Routledge.
Degens, N, Endrass, B, Hofstede, G J, Beulens, A, & André, E 2017. ‘What I see is not what you
get’: why culture-specific behaviours for virtual characters should be user-tested across
cultures. AI & society, vol. 32, no. 1, 37-49.
del Mar Miras‐Rodríguez, M, Carrasco‐Gallego, A, & Escobar‐Pérez, B 2015. Are socially
responsible behaviors paid off equally? A Cross‐cultural analysis. Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, vol. 22, no.4, 237-256.
Fernando, M, & Moore, G 2015. MacIntyrean virtue ethics in business: A cross-cultural
comparison. Journal of business ethics, vol. 132, no.1, 185-202.
French, R 2015. Cross-cultural management in work organisations. Kogan Page Publishers.

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 11
Jyoti, J, & Kour, S 2015. Assessing the cultural intelligence and task performance equation:
Mediating role of cultural adjustment. Cross Cultural Management, vol. 22, no. 2, 236-
258.
Kafetsios, K, Hess, U, & Nezlek, J B 2018. Self-construal, affective valence of the encounter,
and quality of social interactions: Within and cross-culture examination. The Journal of
social psychology, vol. 158, no.1, 82-92.
Kim, H K, Lee, U H, & Kim, Y H 2015. The effect of workplace diversity management in a
highly male-dominated culture. Career Development International, vol. 20, no.3, 259-
272.
Kim, S, & McLean, G N 2014. The impact of national culture on informal learning in the
workplace. Adult Education Quarterly, vol. 64, no. 1, 39-59.
Kinloch, P, & Metge, J 2014. Talking past each other: problems of cross cultural
communication. Victoria University Press.
Lussier, R N, Bandara, C, & Marom, S 2016. Entrepreneurship success factors: an empirical
investigation in Sri Lanka. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and
Sustainable Development, vol. 12, no.2, 102-112.
Mach, M, & Baruch, Y 2015. Team performance in cross cultural project teams: The moderated
mediation role of consensus, heterogeneity, faultlines and trust. Cross Cultural
Management, vol. 22, no.3, 464-486.
Purnell, L 2018. Cross Cultural Communication: Verbal and Non-Verbal Communication,
Interpretation and Translation. In Global Applications of Culturally Competent Health
Care: Guidelines for Practice (pp. 131-142). Springer, Cham.
Rebelo, T 2017. Media Reviews: Center for Organizational Learning, Innovation and Knowledge
website, Institute for Innovation and Knowledge Management website, and Learning in
the Modern Workplace blog. The Learning Organization, vol. 24, no.4, 262-264.
Taylor, G 2018. Workplace culture. Australian Nursing and Midwifery Journal, vol. 26, no.2, 23.

CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT 12
Thomas, D C, & Peterson, M F 2017. Cross-cultural management: Essential concepts. Sage
Publications.
Turner, G, Fiske, J, & Hodge, B 2016. Myths of Oz: reading Australian popular culture.
Routledge.
Warren, T L 2017. Cross-cultural Communication: Perspectives in theory and practice.
Routledge.
Yahaya, R, & Ebrahim, F 2016. Leadership styles and organizational commitment: literature
review. Journal of Management Development, vol. 35, no.2, 190-216.