In this written case model will be explored how certain cultures are different, what is different about them and their effect on the work environment within the exclusive jewelry industry.

This will be explored using different sources of information. First and foremost, the Hofstede model. The Hofstede model is a model for comparing cultures, for this it uses six factors. These factors are: power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation and indulgence. In beginning of the next chapter of this case model there will be a focus on masculinity and power distance. After that the focus will shift to the Erin Meyer Cultural Map, the Erin Meyer Cultural Map is a tool which underlines the Hofstede Model but the focus of this tool is more inter-cultural communication. It is used for example to gage how confrontational a culture is and it shows that along a line. From a culture where avoiding confrontation is the norm to a very confrontational culture. This model helps illustrate the difference and the nuance in these models. For example: A country like the US is more confrontational than Japan, but it comes nowhere close to Russia or the Netherlands.

In the following chapter the focus is with the outcomes of the interview, the analysis of the Hofstede model and the conclusions from the International Criminal Court. The answers from the interview will be compared with the Hofstede Model as well as the conclusions from the ICC and vice versa. First the outcomes will be listed and then they will be compared and analysed using the Hofstede Model and the Erin Meyer Cultural Map.

To conclude the possible solutions for the problems that come to light in Outcomes, will be explored and worked out. These are based in a big part on the interview, that is because the problems experienced at the company are fairly easy to address and if correctly applied, they could be of great help to future and current employees.

Hofstede Dimensions

It is evident, that an analysis of the Hofstede dimensions is important to create an overall perspective of the main differences in cultural elements. Especially two different cultures are influencing the interviewee, the one of the home country (Thailand) and the one of the working/living country (Netherlands). However, the German and New Zealand cultures are additionally included, because two interviewers identify with them, hence, when interpreting the results of the interview, it is necessary to differentiate between them as well (see Figure 1). In the following, the dimensions of power distance, and masculinity of the interviewee in their international working environment are analyzed. The way the interviewee communicates will also be analyzed through including the Cultural Map by Erin Meyer see Figure 2 and 3).

Power distance

As seen in Figure 1, the interviewee has experienced two cultures that are especially different to each other, the Dutch and Thai cultures. As the interviewee said in the interview, working in a Dutch company while originally being from Thailand is difficult in some aspects, e.g. during office hours in stores, because of differences in the understanding of power. The power distance in the Netherlands is relatively low, meaning that the hierarchy at work is rather flat and low- and medium-level employees have the chance to take part in the decision-making process by the high-level managers. Coming from a Thai culture, the interviewee made clear that their understanding of power was definitively higher before. However, it was also mentioned that the power distance is higher in family businesses, compared to regular-run businesses, because the company structure (core parts, key players of company, and number of years in experience) also influences the power distance within, not just the external culture. Through hiring multiple employees from different cultures, the perception of hierarchy merges making it blurry. The Dutch company itself represents the score given on the Hofstede power-distance scale, hence, making it difficult for the interviewee to make decisions on their own in the beginning, while forcing them to cross cultural boundaries and jumping over their own shadow provided by their original home Thai culture.

Masculinity

When looking at the masculinity scores of the Dutch and Thai cultures, it is evident that the Thai culture scores double as high, even if it still on the lower end (see Figure 1). The Dutch culture is very feminine, meaning that “it is important to keep the life/work balance and you make sure that all are included (while an) effective manager is supportive to his/her people, and decision making is achieved through involvement. Managers strive for consensus and people value equality, solidarity, and quality in their working lives. Conflicts are resolved by compromise and negotiation and Dutch are known for their long discussions until consensus has been reached” (Hofstede Dimensions 2021). Coming from a more masculine culture, the interviewee experienced the relationship-based interaction as very positive since the competitive background is not as strong as back home in Thailand. Again, the hiring of employees from different cultures leads to a blur of these scores in the real world. The original company culture, however, corresponds to the very low masculinity score of the Dutch culture. This of course can lead to different motivators to work of workers from different countries.

Erin Meyer cultural map: international communications

Confrontation

The cultural differences shown in the two Hofstede dimensions above are underlined by the Cultural Map by Erin Meyer in which she focuses on communication especially. In Figure 2, it is obvious that the Dutch culture is using confrontational methods of dealing with conflicts, while the Thai culture rather avoids confrontation. This is a very important and difficult difference, because for the interviewee, confrontation is an unpleasant situation in which they do not feel comfortable, which makes international collaboration challenging. Especially when working together with Dutch coworkers, the interviewee finds their active confrontation rude, which can destroy customer relationships. This cultural dimension clearly shows that in an international environment, it is important to use verbal communication to express cultural differences and the possible problems they bring with them.

However, both the confrontational and non-confrontational cultures need to listen to, understand, and somehow adapt to the other to create a common ground for international business. An analysis is a first important step.

Evaluation

The last dimension to analyze is the Evaluation one by Erin Meyer. Again, the Dutch culture is on the far left, giving direct negative feedback (matching the confrontational communication style), and the Thai culture on the far right, only giving indirect negative feedback (matching the avoidance of confrontation) (see Table 3). This makes it difficult for managers to evaluate all of their employees if they do not know and understand their cultural backgrounds. The interviewee finds it rude to directly express negative emotions, which is “normal” for the Dutch culture. Therefore, the interviewee had to put back their own personal culture from Thailand and accept the cultural differences to not take direct negative feedback from managers and colleagues personally.

As seen in the chapters before, and the analysis of the cultural dimensions by Hofstede and Meyer is important to understand differences and also accept them. Once one is aware of the differences, it is possible to openly communicate the wants and needs of each individual to avoid feeling personally offended. Managing an international team can be complicated because it is likely that individuals from different cultures need different treatments. The interviewee showed that it can also be complicated to work with coworkers who have different cultural backgrounds. Being open to sharing own values and opinions, while also being open to listen to other cultural elements is the key to successful international team.

Outcome

As seen in the chapters before, and with the analysis of the cultural dimensions by Hofstede and Meyer it is important to understand differences and also accept them to ensure that people can work together seamlessly without fear of provoking others unnecessarily and accidentally. Generally, when people have an idea of a culture that they are not a part of or do not have an understanding of there will be differences as well as misunderstandings, the way to ensure these don’t happen is to try to be understanding and learn more about the other individuals and their culture without being offensive. This will also strengthen the relationship between all group members, as they will see that they are actively attempting to ensure a smooth crossover among each other, making it an easier environment to work together in a business setting. According to the interviewee the work environment within the Dutch cultures and Thai cultures are different in the regard that the emphasis on relationship vs reward is more prominent, Dutch culture is one that the individuals wish to be able to work in harmony and value relationships slightly more than the Thai culture, who work more based on a system of reward.

Thai culture is more hierarchical and less individual than the Dutch culture, and this difference is visible within the team. Sales results are normally assessed as a team performance, instead assessing results of individuals within the team like in the Netherlands. Also, in the Netherlands, colleagues leave their unfinished tasks when they finish work, but in Thailand it’s expected to finish the tasks before the next shift arrives. So, the Thai people seem to be a bit more motivated than the Dutch.

Huge difference in power distance in Thailand and Netherlands. So, people from Thailand who enter the Dutch labor force have difficulty adjusting because of this cultural difference and vice versa. For example, a Thai person will have difficulties making big and important decisions at a Dutch company because he or she is accustomed to having a boss make those decisions. And for a Dutch person the exact opposite could be said. He or she would have problems with a very authoritarian boss because he is accustomed to a less hierarchical structure within the company.

The Dutch culture is very feminine, while the Thai culture is more masculine. This is not a huge difference but big enough to be noticeable. The Dutch for example want a good relationship with their boss or co-workers whereas the Thai would be more interested in monetary rewards. That being said, this difference is not that big so there would be a lot of Thai interested in a good relationship with their boss and a lot of Dutch more interested in money. But on average Thai people care more about rewards from work than relationships at work and the Dutch on average the other way around.

Once an individual has acquired a basic understanding of intercultural competence and is as perceptive in acknowledging the differences between them and others, it is possible to openly communicate the cultural needs and expectations of each individual to avoid feeling personally offended unintentionally. Working within an international business team can be complicated as each person with a different culture has different requirements and therefore will have different outcomes and understandings when it comes to intercultural competence within the group. The interviewee also explained that working with associates from different cultural backgrounds can be complicated, as seen previously, as unknowingly offending someone can dismantle a strong work environment over a misunderstanding. Being open to sharing each other’s own values and opinions, while also being open to listen to other cultural elements is essentially the key to ensuring a smooth working environment and the success of an international team. 

In the next chapter the possible solutions to the aforementioned problems will be explored.

Possible solutions

In this chapter we will suggest a few ways to handle certain cultural problems and misunderstandings within the workplace. This has to be done to ensure a safe and pleasant work environment for all employees no matter what their cultural background is.

To combat any cultural or social misunderstandings, the company could make the voluntary training that they offer, mandatory in some cases. The company now offers specific voluntary training but the problem is that not a lot of people attend them. By making some mandatory or by recommending it to certain individuals it could mean that the training sessions would be better attended. They could also use the Hofstede Dimensions to scan ahead for possible shortcomings or strengths in their employees based on their cultural background. This of course would not be fool proof because every person is different so just using the Hofstede Dimensions to analyze the employees would not work and maybe even cause problems. That being said, it can almost certainly be used as a tool to help the employee with for example self-awareness and cultural understanding between employees and customers.

Authors

Bram Böhmer (LinkedIn)
Student: 2th years’ Dutch Business, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Block 3, Semester 2, 2022

Aileen Santelmann (LinkedIn)
Student: International business binational, Kozminski University, Warsaw Poland
Year of graduation: 2022
Block 3, Semester 2, 2022

Taimane Hotere (LinkedIn)
Student: International studies, Auckland University of Technology
Year of graduation: 2023
Block 3, Semester 2, 2022

Eva Kingma (LinkedIn)
Student: International studies, Amsterdam School of International Business
Year of graduation: 2023
Block 3, Semester 2, 2022