Travelling in Latin America we don’t see as much of them as expected. Not a problem in our book, but still somewhat surprising, as in some other countries there seems to be one of them just around every corner. Which left us with the question ‘why not in Latin America?’ For various reasons I suppose. To begin with, a lot of Latin American countries are still seriously anti-US. As a lady in La Rioja (Argentina) explained, this has for years been the single most important reason not to teach English at schools. These sentiments must have kept the American food-giants out for a while. But secondly, much more practicable, the local burgers and lomo-steaks are almost impossible to beat. They are huge, tasty and everywhere, plus they are way cheaper than MacDonalds or BurgerKings. The same goes for coffee, as most Latin American countries have their own strong coffee culture. (Which doesn’t mean the coffee is actually good ;-)
But, in the end, I guess it’s a cultural clash. I read an interesting article by Thomas Friedman on ‘the Lexus and the Olive tree’. He describes the conflict between Lexus, dedicated to modernizing, privatizing and globalization, and the olive tree, dedicated to unique traditions, stories, places and families. As globalization pushes further, the question of business and culture (Lexus versus Olive tree) is more and more out there. For if Western companies want to operate in culturally different countries, how do they maintain their management practice and still achieve success far from home? Friedman’s answer is integration, worked out in examples of Starbucks in Korea and IKEA in the US.
Starbucks’ core values include teamwork, equal participation and diversity. When looking to expand in South Korea, Starbucks realized that the Koreans value power distance (see cultural differences). They had to decide if they were willing to be more hierarchical. They decided not to go all black-and-white, and tried to integrate differences. At Starbucks everyone refers to each other as partners, calling each other by first name. This proved to be very discomforting for South Korean employees. As a solution, managers gave every employee an English name, so that they could call each other by their English names. As the English name was used as a substitute for a title plus last name, this did feel comfortable. This way Starbucks’ value of equality was retained. Another point of cultural conflict was Starbucks’ value of teamwork. Every employee does whatever needs to be done. As Korean men traditionally do not do housework-type tasks, such as cleaning toilets and washing dishes, this was a problem. To overcome this (and to get the dishes and the restrooms done) Starbucks adopted a role-modeling approach. This is often very effective in high power distance cultures. Starbucks had the international director do all this. They even hung a picture of him cleaning the toilet!
Only briefly the example of IKEA, who says they value equality even more than your average US company. As they don’t use job titles or clear job descriptions, a cultural conflict raised. The best qualified people in the US simply wanted more status and clearer career perspectives. IKEA changed their recruitment strategy, by emphasizing their values and by providing realistic job previews. Those who did not identify quickly selected themselves out of the company. What IKEA actually did, was to benefit from the large variability in individual values within the US. They were able to select their own suitable employee-subgroup.
The bottom line to me seems the necessity to be culturally aware if you want to be successful. Back to Latin America. Anti-American sentiments seem to soften. English is now taught at schools and internet and MTV have reached the younger generations. But some cultural conflicts remain. In terms of power distance and roles of male employees, it compares somewhat to Korea. Another cultural conflict that arises is the past/present orientation in Latin American countries. As a consequence, the mean management style is quite conservative. Western companies are generally future oriented, which means management includes planning, doing and controlling. And then of course Latin America embraces mañana mañana and value time way different than we do. If Western companies want to be successful over here, they have to deal with punctuality issues. You’d at least have to invest in job interviews and work out different palets of fringe benefits.
Yes, we spent hours and hours in Latin American restaurants. Not to mention how courses sometimes miraculously changed order, or all got served at once. But in the end, competing with local lomo-steaks may well be too much for the Western Burgergiants. We’ll (eat &) drink to that!
But, in the end, I guess it’s a cultural clash. I read an interesting article by Thomas Friedman on ‘the Lexus and the Olive tree’. He describes the conflict between Lexus, dedicated to modernizing, privatizing and globalization, and the olive tree, dedicated to unique traditions, stories, places and families. As globalization pushes further, the question of business and culture (Lexus versus Olive tree) is more and more out there. For if Western companies want to operate in culturally different countries, how do they maintain their management practice and still achieve success far from home? Friedman’s answer is integration, worked out in examples of Starbucks in Korea and IKEA in the US.
Starbucks’ core values include teamwork, equal participation and diversity. When looking to expand in South Korea, Starbucks realized that the Koreans value power distance (see cultural differences). They had to decide if they were willing to be more hierarchical. They decided not to go all black-and-white, and tried to integrate differences. At Starbucks everyone refers to each other as partners, calling each other by first name. This proved to be very discomforting for South Korean employees. As a solution, managers gave every employee an English name, so that they could call each other by their English names. As the English name was used as a substitute for a title plus last name, this did feel comfortable. This way Starbucks’ value of equality was retained. Another point of cultural conflict was Starbucks’ value of teamwork. Every employee does whatever needs to be done. As Korean men traditionally do not do housework-type tasks, such as cleaning toilets and washing dishes, this was a problem. To overcome this (and to get the dishes and the restrooms done) Starbucks adopted a role-modeling approach. This is often very effective in high power distance cultures. Starbucks had the international director do all this. They even hung a picture of him cleaning the toilet!
Only briefly the example of IKEA, who says they value equality even more than your average US company. As they don’t use job titles or clear job descriptions, a cultural conflict raised. The best qualified people in the US simply wanted more status and clearer career perspectives. IKEA changed their recruitment strategy, by emphasizing their values and by providing realistic job previews. Those who did not identify quickly selected themselves out of the company. What IKEA actually did, was to benefit from the large variability in individual values within the US. They were able to select their own suitable employee-subgroup.
The bottom line to me seems the necessity to be culturally aware if you want to be successful. Back to Latin America. Anti-American sentiments seem to soften. English is now taught at schools and internet and MTV have reached the younger generations. But some cultural conflicts remain. In terms of power distance and roles of male employees, it compares somewhat to Korea. Another cultural conflict that arises is the past/present orientation in Latin American countries. As a consequence, the mean management style is quite conservative. Western companies are generally future oriented, which means management includes planning, doing and controlling. And then of course Latin America embraces mañana mañana and value time way different than we do. If Western companies want to be successful over here, they have to deal with punctuality issues. You’d at least have to invest in job interviews and work out different palets of fringe benefits.
Yes, we spent hours and hours in Latin American restaurants. Not to mention how courses sometimes miraculously changed order, or all got served at once. But in the end, competing with local lomo-steaks may well be too much for the Western Burgergiants. We’ll (eat &) drink to that!
No comments:
Post a Comment