How Can Managers Motivate Culturally Diverse Teams.

How can managers motivate culturally diverse teams?
As organisations respond to the forces of globalisation, they are expanding beyond their local
markets into international markets as multinational corporations (MNC’s) (Deresky, 2017). In a
highly competitive international market, organisations are seeking the best team members to
compete effectively and efficiently, regardless of their nationality (Mustajbašić & Husaković,
2016). Consequently, traditionally homogenous teams have evolved into culturally diverse teams
across nations and in the virtual sphere. Subsequently, knowledge transfer and team synergy are
interrupted by barriers arising from members’ heterogenous cultural beliefs, behaviours,
cognition and values (Cagiltay, Kaplan & Bichelmeyer, 2015). Aside from these barriers,
multicultural teams are exceedingly desirable for their diverse perspectives, skill sets and
creativity which leads to greater innovation and problem solving if managed effectively
(Deresky, 2017). It is the manager’s responsibility to effectively motivate and lead these diverse
teams towards achieving organisational goals. This research paper serves as a tool to inform
managers of cultural diversity, what motivates various cultures and how they can lead effective,
efficient and highly productive multicultural teams.
A team is a group of two or more individuals whose work is interdependent on another’s to
achieve a shared goal (Robbins & Coulter, 2016). According to Robbins and Coulter (2016), an
organisation’s culture dictates the roles and norms that team members are expected to follow.
Mockaitis, Zander and De Cieri (2018) explain that, in their elected roles, managers exhibit
specific behaviour that leads their team to success. Additionally, managers inform their team
members of the expectations (norms) they have towards the members’ loyalty, efforts and
performances (Deresky, 2017). Knein, Greven, Bendig and Brettel (2020) posit, a team must
conform and collaborate their efforts to meet its goals. Therefore a team’s goals must align with
the organisation's goals to promote cohesion and productivity (Deresky, 2017). However, a
barrier to this conformity and unity is the socio-cultural context of the team members (Cagiltay,
Kaplan & Bichelmeyer, 2015). This, being their national cultures and subsequent dissimilarities
which extends the differences between countries’ cultures, also known as cultural distance
(Boscari, Bortolotti, Netland & Rich, 2018).
1

National cultures are the value systems and attitudes that are shared by a group of people from a
specific country that shapes their social norms, behaviours, expectations and understandings
which distinguishes them from other cultures (Erciyes, 2019). This point is challenged by
Beugelsdijk, Kostova and Roth (2016) whereby they state that culture does not only originate
from a country but rather from different regions, generations, social groups and socioeconomic
groups. Disadvantages of multicultural teams include issues surrounding stereotypes,
communication issues and mistrust between team members, however, these multicultural teams
also present the organisation with a greater diversity of ideas, restricted groupthink and an
increased attention spent on understanding others’ perspectives (Robbins & Coulter, 2016).
Nonetheless, fundamentally, ‘national’ culture shapes peoples’ behaviours and beliefs of what is
important (Robbins & Coulter, 2016; Knein et. al, 2020). Furthermore, Khan and Law (p. 37,
2018) contend national culture influences how people interpret, evaluate and understand
concepts and communication because it “shapes their customs, ideas, habits, traditions, language,
and shared systems of attitudes and feelings”. Finally, this will influence how individuals solve
problems, make decisions, communicate and orient themselves towards tasks or relationships
(Deresky, 2017). Cultural intelligence, which is an individual’s skills and ability to be aware of,
relate to and be sensitive towards other cultures’ needs, values and behaviours (Robbins &
Coulter, 2016).
In 1980, Gert Hofstede created a framework which conceptualises the relationship between a
country's national culture and their values (Beugelsdijk et. al, 2016). Five independent
dimensions show how the country’s culture impacts its citizens’ behaviours. They are as follows:
Power distance (PD) regards how a culture distributes power amongst its people, therefore it also
pertains to equality and authority (Hollenback, Gerhart & Wright, 2018). Additionally,
uncertainty avoidance (UA) concerns how threatened people are by ambiguous future situations
(Erciyes, 2019). Moreover, individualism-collectivism expresses the strength of the relationship
between an individual and others in a culture (Hollenback et. al, 2018). Furthermore, masculine
cultures value achievement, competition and assertion whereas feminine cultures value
relationships, fairness and the wellbeing of people and the environment (Deresky, 2017). Lastly,
2

long term orientation versus short term orientation indicates whether cultures look to the future,
value saving and are persistent or if they are short term oriented and focus on values and
traditions of the past (Hollenback et. al, 2018).
Besides Hofstede’s Framework, in 2004 the Global Leadership and Organisational Behaviour
Effectiveness program was established to supplement Hofstede’s dimensions and managers’
knowledge on identifying and managing cultural differences (Robbins & Coulter, 2016). Out of
the nine dimensions, three new dimensions were identified; gender-differentiation, in-group
collectivism, and performance orientation (Robbins & Coulter, 2016). Robbins and Coulter
(2016) state, gender differentiation examines how much society enables women to be in decision
making and leadership roles. Additionally, Deresky (2017) defines in-group collectivism as the
degree to which individuals take pride in their belonging to social and professional groups.
Finally Robbins and Coulter (2016) describe the performance orientation dimension as the extent
to which a culture uplifts and honours group members for excellent improvement and
performance.
Whilst some individuals will want to strictly abide by their norms and values in a ‘tight culture’,
others will be more conforming and not abide as strictly to their norms and values in their ‘loose
culture’ (Deresky, 2017). It is a manager’s prerogative to understand, manage and leverage their
employees’ needs, goals, values and expectations to effectively lead and motivate them.
Motivation is a psychological process that results in goal or performance directed behaviour that
satisfies human needs (Cook & Artino, 2016). According to Maslow in Deresky (2017), needs
are a feeling of deficit. Cook and Artino (2016) declare intrinsic motivation originates from an
individual’s desire to do an activity for its innate satisfaction such as curiosity and pleasure;
whereas extrinsic motivation, entails external rewards and punishments which directs an
individual to perform the appropriate behaviour.
Mustajbašić and Husaković (2016) have identified the following: employees from a high PD
culture are motivated by hierarchy, security status whilst employees from a low PD culture are
motivated by teamwork. Additionally, employees from a high UA are motivated by stability in
3

their positions whilst those in low UA cultures are motivated by unfamiliar risks. Besides this,
employees from a more individualist culture are motivated by competition whilst those from a
more collective culture are motivated by friendship and collaboration. Moreover, employees
from a masculine culture are motivated by rigid structures and long-term orientation whereas
employees from feminine cultures are more motivated by a short-term orientation with less
restrictions in their role.
In the opinion of Alghazo and Al-Anazi (2016), managers must aim to create an environment
that is conducive to improve employee performance. Firstly, management should query which of
their employees’ needs are satisfied through working, this is known as the meaning of work
(Deresky, 2017). The general need that drives people to work is for an income (Sharabi, 2017).
However employees also work out of interest, to make contact with others, to serve society, to
keep occupied, and to earn status and prestige (Zhao & Pan, 2017). What determines their
importance is what individuals value as well as the economic stability of the country they are
working in (Deresky, 2017; Sharabi, 2017). Additionally, managers should consider employees’
work centralities, which is the relative importance work poses to people in comparison to leisure,
community, religion and family differs between cultures (Khan & Panarina, 2018).
According to Fiaz, Qin, Ikram and Saqib (2017) there are two kinds of motivation theories.
Firstly need-oriented motivation stipulates, individuals are driven to satisfy their needs (Badubi,
2017). Whereas process-oriented motivation asserts that individuals’ behaviours are started,
directed and stopped through the inclusion or exclusion of variables which either punish or
reinforce a behaviour (Badubi, 2017).
Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in Robbins and Coulter (2016) proposed that every
individual, regardless of culture, has five levels of needs. In his need-oriented model, Maslow
progresses from physiological needs, to security needs protection from emotional and physical
harm, thereafter social needs such as affection, friendship and belongingness, subsequently
esteem like autonomy, achievement and recognition follow and finally self actualisation needs
like growth, potential and self-fulfillment. Once a lower-level need is met, people progress to
higher level needs (Badubi, 2017).
4