CULTURE AND MANAGEMENT: A STUDY OF VIETNAMESE CULTURAL

INFLUENCES ON MANAGMENT STYLE

by

Henry Hoang

KATHLEEN HARGISS, Ph.D., Faculty Mentor and Chair

GARY ROBINSON, Ph.D., Committee Member

SHEAU-WEI FU, Ph.D., Committee Member

Kurt Linberg, Ph.D., Dean, School of Business & Technology

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University

April 2008

UMI Number: 3297920

32979202008

Copyright 2008 byHoang, Henry

UMI MicroformCopyright

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

All rights reserved.

by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.

Henry Hoang, 2008

Abstract

This empirical study focuses on cultural influences on management styles related

to Vietnamese society in the city of Houston which can help to increase self-awareness;

and promote positive interaction with managers from diverse cultural backgrounds. It

provides data which may be needed by managers from other cultures so that they may

adjust their approach to Vietnamese culture which can open new opportunities to expand

and accelerate their business growth and profitability. An understanding of Vietnamese

cultural values will not only provide insight into the Vietnamese character and

background which accounts for their management styles, but may also help bridge the

cultural gap and implement processes that can have a positive impact on the business

community.

Results of the empirical study indicated that there are significant differences in

Vietnam cultural dimensional indices between Hofstede in 2001 and this study. The

power distance index, particularly, was changed from high power distance (found by

Hofstede 2001) to todays finding of a very low power distance culture. The

individualism scores swung from a relative collectivist to this studys finding of strongly

individualistic. The long-term orientation score was also changed from high long-term

orientation to this studys finding of relatively short-term oriented. This studys

masculinity score was roughly equivalent to Hofstedes masculinity score. In addition,

the results of an empirical study also indicated that the Vietnamese management style is

not significantly different from the American. Both American and Vietnamese managers

place significant emphasis on supervisory style, decision making, and control mechanism

the difference seems to be that the Vietnamese managers also place a higher degree of

emphasis on communication pattern than do their American counterparts. Control

mechanism and paternalistic orientation styles seem to be appropriate with the

Vietnamese culture and can be effective in family business or small-scale organizations.

In today's knowledge based global economy, an understanding and appreciating

of cultural differences have become critically important to cross-cultural management.

When cultural differences are properly understood and appreciated it helps to increase

self-awareness, and promote an effective business relationship which can result in greater

cooperation among business men and women from diverse cultural backgrounds.

iii

Dedication

This endeavor is dedicated to my mother, Hoang Thi Chi, and my siblings. They

have always been a great source of encouragement to me, their support and love, keeping

alive the hope that I really could do this scholarly journey.

iv

Acknowledgments

It has been a long and challenging journey, but in the end, it was all worth it. I

have grown both personally and professionally though this journey. The pursuit of my

education and the completion of my dissertation would not have been possible without

many special people in my life.

First, I would like to thank my dissertation committees, Dr. Hargiss, Dr.

Robinson, and Dr. Fu. Without their assistance and supported, I would not have been able

to complete this study. I would like to express my sincere thanks to the following

individuals who, without their personal support, this study would not have been possible:

Kim Chau Pham and Lois Hancock. I have been fortunate indeed to work with such fine

professions from whom I have learned very much.

Finally, the completion of this study would not be possible without my family. To

my wife, Thao Hoang, my Daughters, Lynn and Lillian Hoang, and my mother-in-law,

Xuyen Van, thank you for your continued love and support in all that I do in life. Without

you, none of this would be possible.

v

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments................................................................................................................6

List of Tables .....................................................................................................................10

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1

Introduction to the Problem ...........................................................................................1 Background of the Problem ...........................................................................................7 Statement of the Problem.............................................................................................11 Purpose of the Study ....................................................................................................12 Significance of the Study .............................................................................................12 Nature of the Study ......................................................................................................14 Rationale of the Study..................................................................................................16 Research Questions and Hypothesis ............................................................................17 Theoretical Framework................................................................................................19

Construct Definitions of Management and Culture...............................................21 Theoretical Model........................................................................................................22 Definition of Terms......................................................................................................22 Assumption of the Study..............................................................................................24 Limitations of the Study...............................................................................................25 Organization of the Study ............................................................................................26 Summary ......................................................................................................................26

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................28

Introduction..................................................................................................................28 Perceptions of Effective Management A Classical Perspective ...............................29

Scientific Management...........................................................................................29 Administrative Theory............................................................................................30 Theory of Bureaucracy ..........................................................................................31

Theory of Administrative Behavior .............................................................................32 Management Styles Concepts ......................................................................................33

Theory X and Theory Y ..........................................................................................33 Theory Z .................................................................................................................35

Achievement Motivation Theory.................................................................................36 Dimensions of Management Styles .............................................................................38

Defining Management Styles .................................................................................39 Supervision Style ....................................................................................................41 Decision Making ....................................................................................................42 Communication Pattern .........................................................................................42 Control Mechanism................................................................................................42 Interdepartmental Relations ..................................................................................43 Paternalistic Orientation .......................................................................................43

Dimensions of Culture .................................................................................................43

vi

Defining Culture ....................................................................................................45 Power Distance (PDI)............................................................................................46 Individualism (IDV) ...............................................................................................47 Masculinity (MAS) .................................................................................................48 Uncertainty Avoidance (UA)..................................................................................48 Long-Term Orientation (LTO) ...............................................................................49

Cross-Cultural Research ..............................................................................................50 The GLOBE Project.....................................................................................................52 Value/Belief Theory.....................................................................................................53 Some Traits of the Vietnamese Culture .......................................................................54

Religions ................................................................................................................54 Language................................................................................................................55 Education ...............................................................................................................56 Family ....................................................................................................................56 Social Relations .....................................................................................................57

Summary ......................................................................................................................59

CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...............................................................61

Introduction..................................................................................................................61 Research Design...........................................................................................................62 Validity and Reliability................................................................................................66

Triangulation .........................................................................................................66 Reliability ...............................................................................................................67 Validity ...................................................................................................................67

Interview Questions .....................................................................................................68 Sampling Design..........................................................................................................71 The Researchers Role .................................................................................................72 Data Collection Procedures..........................................................................................73 Instrumentation ............................................................................................................74

Qualitative..............................................................................................................74 Quantitative............................................................................................................75 Variables ................................................................................................................75

Data Analysis and Interpretations................................................................................76 Ethical Issues ...............................................................................................................78

Data Security .........................................................................................................78 Risks and Benefits of Participants .........................................................................79 Consent Form and Confidentiality Agreement ......................................................79

Summary ......................................................................................................................80

CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS.................................................81

Introduction..................................................................................................................81 The Demographic Context...........................................................................................81 Quantitative Results .....................................................................................................84

vii

Quantitative Results: Cultural Values ...................................................................84 Power Distance ......................................................................................................85 Individualism..........................................................................................................85 Masculinity.............................................................................................................86 Uncertainty Avoidance...........................................................................................86 Long-term Orientation ...........................................................................................87

Quantitative Results: Management Styles Dimensions ...............................................88 Hypothesis....................................................................................................................93 Qualitative Results .......................................................................................................99

Review of Combined Question Results ................................................................101 Summary ....................................................................................................................106

CHAPTER 5. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS...............108

Study Summary..........................................................................................................108 Purpose of the Study and Research Questions...........................................................110 Theoretical Model Discussion ...................................................................................111

Power Distance ....................................................................................................111 Individualism........................................................................................................113 Masculinity...........................................................................................................114 Uncertainty Avoidance.........................................................................................115 Long-Term Orientation ........................................................................................115

Demographic Analysis...............................................................................................116 Quantitative Findings.................................................................................................117 Qualitative Findings...................................................................................................118 Cultural Dimensions for Vietnam..............................................................................120 Limitations of the Study.............................................................................................122 Conclusions................................................................................................................122 Recommendations......................................................................................................125

Recommendations for Future Research...............................................................125 Recommendations for Practice ............................................................................126 Implications for Social Change ...........................................................................126

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................128

APPENDIX A. HOFSTEDES ORIGINAL VALUES SURVEY MODULE 1994.......138 APPENDIX B. CULPAN AND KUCUKEMIROGLU PERMISSIONS .......................144 APPENDIX C. PARTS I AND II OF MANAGEMENT SURVEY QUESTIONNARIES .............................................................................146 APPENDIX D. CONSENT FORM .................................................................................151 APPENDIX E. COVER LETTERS.................................................................................153 APPENDIX F. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ...................................................................155 APPENDIX G. SUMMARIES OF INTERIEW TRANSCRIPTS..................................157

viii

List of Tables

Table 1. Profiles of the Managers ..................................................................................... 83 Table 2. Comparison of Vietnamese with United States Using VSM 94......................... 87 Table 3. Constructive Management Valued by Vietnamese Mangers.............................. 89 Table 4. Management Style Dimensions Correlations ..................................................... 91 Table 5. Comparison of Management Styles Dimension Scores...................................... 92 Table 6. Regression on Cultural Values Predicting Supervision Style............................. 96 Table 7. Regression on Cultural Values Predicting Decision Making ............................. 96 Table 8. Regression on Cultural Values Predicting Communication Pattern................... 97 Table 9. Regression on Cultural Values Predicting Control Mechanism ......................... 98 Table 10. Regression on Cultural Values Predicting Interdepartmental Relations .......... 98 Table 11. Regression on Cultural Values Predicting Paternalistic Orientation ................ 99 Table 12. Comparison of Dimension for Vietnam from Hofstede and Current Study ... 120

ix

List of Figure

Figure 1. Multidimensional analysis of the Management Styles Factors ..........................22

1

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Problem

The Asian American population has grown rapidly over the past three decades.

According to the 2000 U.S. Bureau of Census (2000), those who identify only as Asian-

American comprise 3.6% of the American population, approximately 10 million

individuals. The Census Bureau projects that the Asian-American population will grow to

37.6 million individuals by the year 2050, comprising 9.3% of the population (U.S.

Bureau of Census, 2000). The results of this growth present challenges for many business

managers from other cultures in their interaction with Asian Americans. Different

cultures, manners, expectations and perspectives can create awkward situations which

can impact a manager's effectiveness. Many managers who are successful in their

domestic operations often find that the mental maps they relied on for years do not

necessarily apply to the Asian American (Black and Gregersen, 2000). There has been

considerable concern about whether the attitudes, behavior, and management styles are

different across cultures and nations (Adler, 1983; Hofstede, 2001; Trompenaars, 1994).

Knowledge of cross-cultural differences has practical importance for managers and

executives to understand, to address and to meet with their counterparts in their working

environments. Indeed, an understanding of how cultural differences affect management

styles is important to organizational operation. It has implications for the successful

development and implementation of strategic alliances. Mead (1994) notes that the

greater the cultural differences between the partners, the more difficult it is to attain

satisfactory and successful business relationships.

2

This study focuses on the cultural characteristics of the 12 Vietnamese managers

in the city of Houston. Vietnamese makes up the largest group of Asians population in

the city of Houston according to the 2002 U.S. Bureau of Census (U.S. Bureau of Census

Bureau, 2002). The number of Vietnamese business owners in the city of Houston-

Baytown-Huntsville of Texas is 11, 834 (U.S. Bureau of Census, 2002). Although the

Vietnamese firms in Houston are not becoming powerful business units yet, their success

in the past two decades has raised some questions about how the Vietnamese manage

their own businesses in the most effective manner. Robinson and Stephen (1993) stated

that Vietnamese immigrants, generally in this country less than 25 years, now have the

highest per capita income of any ethnic group in the United States (p. 2). The

Vietnameses philosophy to achieve the American dream is hard work leading to a better

life. Through cultural molding, the Vietnamese have learned since their childhood to

endure and to get acquainted with suffering. The early teaching of endurance had the

power to immunize Vietnamese business women and men against eventual hardships and

made them willing to work unusually long hours. The Vietnamese's cultural values

describe abstract ideas about what Vietnamese society believes to be good, right, and

desirable. It is based on four basic tenets: allegiance to the family, yearning for a good

name, love of learning, and respect for other people. In this perspective, cultural values

are often reflected in the behavior, belief, and attitudes of the Vietnamese people.

Therefore, the needs for research on the cultural characteristics of the other subcultures

were most articulated and expressed by Hofstede (1984). His writings are too rich and

relevant to the purpose of this study to summarize. Hence they are presented here in full:

3

The survival of mankind will depend to a large extent of the ability of people who

think differently to act together. International collaboration presupposes some

understanding of where others thinking differs from ours. Exploring the way in

which nationality predisposes our thinking is therefore not an intellectual luxury.

A better understanding of invisible cultural differences is one of the main

contributions the social sciences can make to practical policy makers in

governments, organizations, and institutions and to ordinary citizens. (p. 8).

As the formation and current growth of many Vietnamese businesses in the city of

Houston has created more opportunities for many corporations to expand, it has also

prompted a subtle obstacle for people and social systems as Western culture clashes with

the Vietnamese culture. In business discussion, for example, the Vietnamese want to talk

about a number of areas of mutual interest whereas the American mentality is lets do a

deal. The issue of cultural factors for many U.S. managers expanding in Asian business

has increasingly attracted academic attention in the field of business (Buckley 2002).

Culture and subculture are the most important aspects in this recent shift of business

behaviors. From the 1960s onwards, management researchers have shown interest in the

concept of culture because it was believed that culture has an influence on managerial

behavior and performance (Lim & Firkola, 2000, p. 133). Culture, when viewed from

this perspective, is a process that influences management by affecting the quality of

coordination, the functions, the roles, and the responsibilities for attaining goals. This

must be true, regardless of individual cultural differences, in order to accomplish a

common purpose within the organization. The main interest of culture and management

research lies in the issues of cultural influences on managerial behaviors. Specifically,

4

can it be proven that cultural dimensions have an influence on management styles (or can

it be posited that management styles are a consequence of cultural dimensions)? In

essence, is there an acceptable theory that can be used to explain relationships between

culture and managerial behavior in organizations? Bhagat and McQuaid (1982) stated

that current research suggests that there is no general theory describing the relationship

between cultural and management (p. 675).

Hofstede (1993) advised that:

Management as the word is presently used is an American invention. In other

parts of the world not only the practices but the entire concept of management

may differ, and the theories needed to understand it, may deviate considerably

from what is considered normal and desirable in the USA (p. 81).

The author views management" as the way to describe a process and "managers

for the persons involved (Hofstede, 1993, p. 86). He further explains that "management"

in the American sense refers not only to the process but also to the managers as a class of

people.

This class (1) does not own a business but sells its skills to act on behalf of the

owners and (2) does not produce personally but is indispensable for making others

produce, through motivation. Members of this class carry a high status and many

American boys and girls aspire to the role. In the U.S., the manager is a cultural

hero (Hotstede, 1993, p. 88).

As with the concepts of management, Trompenaars (1994) found that some form

of cultural concepts of the management in other counties are not easy to grasp and

unpopular once it is understood (p. 3). Additionally, Trompenaars uses an onion ring

5

model of culture. He assigns artifacts and products as the visible tip, and relegates values

and norms as the inner layer which surrounds a core of basic management (2003).

Therefore, it can even be argued that proper understanding and proper handling of

cultural and subcultural issues is a prerequisite for successful management.

Although research by Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993) found that there are

specific U.S management styles that differ significantly in comparsion to Japanese

practice. The authors concluded that Although management is always culture-bound to

some extent, certain management practices are less culture-bound than others. Thus,

some techniques might be nurtured in different environments as long as they are applied

properly (p. 37). Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993) compare the management styles in

a conceptual framework consisting of six managerial dimensions (supervision styles,

decision making, communication pattern, control mechanism, paternalistic orientation,

and interdepartmental relations). In studying the economic growth of 20 nations Franke,

Hofstede and Bond (1991) determined that With business becoming more international,

effective strategic management requires accounting for fundamental national differences

(p. 165). Indeed, the meaning and manifestation of cultural characteristics are as unique

as an individuals experience and world view. The authors concluded that national

cultural differences often are treated at the level of gut feeling (Fanke et al., 1991, p.

172).

People and their culture is an issue common to all organizations. Culture is also

an area that has been identified as a cause of organization failure, since everyone brings

their own culture to the organization; but the boundary between culture and management

has become blurred. There are some cross-cultural researchers who ignore factors at both

6

the individual and contextual levels, and events together. Another serious drawback from

which many of the cross cultural studies of management suffer is the way the researchers

treat culture as a residual factor. The researchers often compare a group of managers and

observe some differences in the way they view certain aspects of their work, and then, in

the absence of non-cultural explanations for these differences, attribute them to culture.

Given the inherent multilayered complexity of studying cultural characteristics and

management styles, DSourza and Peretiatko (2005) suggested that in-depth studies at the

local level could uncover the meaning given to managerial behavior. In discussing the

challenges of finding correlations between cross-culture and management Hofstede

(1983) notes the following:

Both management practitioners and management theorists over the past 80 years

have been blind to the extent to which activities like management and

organization are culturally dependent. They are culturally dependent because

managing and organizing do not consist of making or moving tangible objects,

but of manipulating symbols which have meaning to the people who are managed

or organized. Because the meaning which we associate with symbols is heavily

affected by what we have learned in our family, in our school, in our work

environment, and in our society, management and organization are penetrated

with culture from the beginning to the end (p. 88).

This approach lends support to the idea of the need for study of Vietnamese

cultural influences on management styles at the local level. The purpose of this study is

to identify and describe the cultural characteristics of Vietnamese business management

in the city of Houston and Vietnamese perception of constructive management attributes.

7

Background of the Problem

Traditional explanations of management behavior based on concepts of values,

norms, ethics, and activity within organizations have been changing. As more and more

organizations develop alliances and cross national borders, the importance of the role

played by culture, and particularly its effect on management behaviors, has attracted

much more interest by many researchers. Culture and subculture are important aspects in

changes to management behaviors. Culture, when viewed from this perspective, is a

process that influences management by affecting the quality of coordination, functions,

roles, and responsibilities for attaining goals. This must be true, regardless of individual

cultural differences, in order to accomplish a common purpose within the organization. In

other words, cultural difference has a great influence on management behavior. Andre

Laurent (1983) believed that individual managers hold their own set of beliefs about good

and bad management behavior that are molded from their own national cultures. Every

manager has his own management theory, his own set of representations and preferences

that in some way guide his potential behaviors in organizations; and it is critical for

managers, management researchers and educators to identify and understand these

theories of management better (Laurent, 1983, p. 76). Mead (1998) indicated that

"differences between national cultures create important opportunities for growth and

development, but also can cause serious problems if they are not understood" (p.3).

Perhaps the most influential of cultural classifications is that of Geert Hofstede,

whose publication, Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related

Values (Hofstede, 1984, 2001) marks an important moment in the field of cross-cultural

studies. Many researchers and social scientists have utilized Hofstede's cultural values

8

framework in a wide variety of empirical studies related to workplace behaviors, attitudes

and organizational behaviors (e.g., chwartz, 1994; Ronen and Shenkar, 1985). Cultures

Consequences has inspired thousands of empirical studies, and there is no denying the

huge impact his work has had on business thinking over the past two decades. Merritt

(2000) reports the results of a survey of 9,400 workers in 19 countries confirming the

predictive validity of the measures. The author concludes that the successful replication

confirms that national culture exerts a significant influence on senior-level workers

within a specific industry that impacts their behavior beyond the level of professional

factors that would typically affect their behavior in the workplace. Further, cross-cultural

research has found evidence for differences in managerial behavior across different

cultures, especially in situations involving an ethical dimension (e.g. Jackson and Artola,

1997).

In discussing how a managers behavior may be interpreted differently in various

cultures, Michael (1997) gave the example that American managers establish

interpersonal relationships in organizations primarily for political rather than for affect

purposes; Asian managers appear to be motivated more by affect than political (p. 53).

Additionally, Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993) explained that culture is strongly linked

to management style and processes in todays business. As long as we have different

cultures, management systems as a by-product of culture will manifest unique

characteristics in given country. Therefore, we need further studies to examine

similarities and differences in managerial styles across nations (p. 39). Managers of

organizations in todays business environment require ability to get under the skin of

people from different cultural backgrounds at all levels throughout the organization. An

9

understanding of the cultural context and value systems of those they lead has become

vital for the success or failure of any organization, and understanding of the other is often

the essence of successful management.

Understanding management, and what constitutes effective management, has

progressed substantially over the past four decades. The studies on the implications of

cultural influences on management has received special interest since the globalization

revolution, when the need to become more competitive by bringing innovative products

to the market quickly and to access a wider range of consumers over the world become

crucial. Since this form of business was initiated in America and Europe, it is not

surprising that the study of culture and management was largely founded on American

and European cultures. Academic research on management of Asian American business

and private organizations in non-Western countries, however, is sparse. Lowe (2002) and

Sekaran (1983) stated that much research on cross cultural differences has been focused

predominantly on exploring American theories and how they work in different countries

instead of looking at the theories indigenous to a culture and exploring them in depth. In

addition, much of the limited research has focused on challenges, problems and

differences that are particularly culture-specific. However, there has still been no

systematic study of the cultural characteristics of Vietnamese and their perception of

constructive management attributes (Ralston et al., 1999).

One of the keys to understanding the difficulties in cross-cultural and

management research is that the field does not fit into any one standard approach for

application of culture and its consequences in management. For years, scholars argued

about the impact of culture on management. One group of scholars maintained that

10

managers behaviors, including their values, attitudes, beliefs and identity were becoming

more similar (convergence), while the other scholars concluded that it was maintaining

its dissimilarity (divergence) (Ralston et al., 1995). In addition, a recent perspective,

crossvergence, has argued that when individuals "blend" their cultural values with the

influences from work environment, they develop a unique set of behaviors that borrow

from both culture and work environment (Ralston et al., 1993, 189). Convergency theory

involves pragmatic issues that can push one in the direction of adopting a one best way

approach to the management of organizations. By contrast, the divergency theory

assumes that elements such as different values and behaviors, differing stages of

economic development and unevenly distributed global resources will guarantee global

diversity. Conversely, crossvergence provides a third alternative. Thus, proponents of

crossvergence argue that there will be an integration of both cultural and ideological

influences that results in a unique value system that has borrowed from both culture and

ideology (Ralston, et al., 1993, p. 190). These approaches, convergence, divergence and

crossvergence, represent three sides of the culture and management debate concerning

which approach is most relevant to classify research methods and topics into some

overall framework to examine cross cultural phenomena and management. As discussed

in Ralston et al. (1995), the authors indicated that focusing effort on understanding and

coordinating the different cultural values would be a more beneficial strategy than trying

to force-fit into a single approach used in studying managerial work values.

Culture is a phenomenon that neither management scholars nor practitioners can

afford to ignore when facing the realities of today's business world, regardless of where

they are physically located, where they conduct their work, or what their specific

11

discipline or function may be. As Berhard (2000) suggested, it would be necessary for

researchers, educators and practitioners in the fields of international and cross cultural

management to study an analysis of the local cultures in order to critically examine the

way in which they treat and use the concept of culture.

Statement of the Problem

This study will address is the shortage of information on cultural values and

management styles related to Vietnamese managers, particularly the Vietnamese society

in Houston. Culture has been identified as an important determinant of managerial

behaviors because each individual manager holds their own set of beliefs about good and

bad management behavior that are molded from their own national cultures. Because

culture and management influence each other, this study specifically examines and

analyzes the relationships among cultural dimensions and management styles of the

Vietnamese business managers in the city of Houston.

The Vietnamese community is considered one of the major subcultures in the city

of Houston. Their culture is attained through life experiences and education more than

through wealth or material possession. Therefore, business practices will differ in

Vietnamese society compared to the other Asian cultures. The existing of these

differences is a challenge to other managers from other cultures in dealing with

Vietnamese business managers. In addition, the size of the company, the age and level of

other business associates, as well as their familiarity with Vietnamese business practices

will all have an impact on working relationships. Increasing the level of knowledgeable

12

and awareness about Vietnamese business practices and cultures will certainly increase a

managers chance of business success with the Vietnamese.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this mixed method approach study is to identify and describe the

cultural characteristics of Vietnamese business management in the city of Houston and

the Vietnamese perception of constructive management attributes. This is for the specific

purpose of providing data which could be used in the training of managers and other

industry organizations so that they would be more effective in their interactions with

local Vietnamese managers. The data should enable manager from other cultures to

establish personal practices in keeping with the values of the Vietnamese and an effective

relationship which results in greater cooperation. Also, the contribution to understanding

the values of Vietnamese culture in management will definitely benefit several relevant

current and planned operational works of the businesses which are directly linked to the

Vietnamese businesses.

An understanding of cultural differences helps people adjust their communication

style and behavior appropriately in any business practices. Cultural values are often

reflected in the behavior and attitudes of the people. An understanding of Vietnamese

cultural values can provide insight into the Vietnamese management practices.

Significance of the Study

This study contributes to positive social change by heightening awareness of the

impact of culture differences on management styles, and using that knowledge to tap into

13

peoples unique power and potential, thus unleashing the talent that exists. Organizations

which support work environment improvement and understanding of human behavior

would appear to be those best equipped to face the challenging task of management in the

todays competitive market, which, in turn, makes it easier to hire and keep qualified

people. This study will not only contribute to understanding and appreciation of cultural

differences, broaden and deepen worldviews that stimulate our thinking and creativity in

management functions, roles and skills but also contribute to the broader literature on

organizational behavior and commitment, organizational climate, and management theory

creation. Further, the study proposes capability and empirical model of these

relationships that can be used in improving our understanding of and facilitation of cross-

cultural communication as a fundamental skill for general management.

The resultant information and perspective of the study may be used in the training

of American businesses management to establish an efficient and professional business

relationship with Vietnamese managers, peers, and subordinates. Since business is

becoming more global in nature, multicultural interaction will increase as a part of doing

business and managers will need to become more capable of working with people from

different cultures. Because values differ across cultures, an understanding of these

differences should be helpful in explaining and predicting the behavior of Vietnamese

business owners and managers.

The analytical approach on which this study is based and the scientific objectives

for the specific culture and management styles can serve as a template for conducting

similar studies for other subcultures in other locations. Review of previous management

research has indicated that culture profoundly influences all aspect of management

14

behavior (Adler, 1997; Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1987, 1992; Mead, 1994). House et al.

(1997) explained that the vast majority of cross-cultural management studies

operationalize cultures by using national or regional political borders as proxies for the

boundaries of cultures. This approach ignores the possible existence of subcultural units

(p. 543). This study responds, in part, to the need for more research into the interaction

between culture and management styles at the local level. Due to the uniqueness of

practice of management in different countries, the methodology employed in this study

may need some modification for application in other countries.

Nature of the Study

This study will be conducted with a specific Vietnamese population in the city of

Houston, in zip code 77072, in the local businesses at a specific point in time. The

Vietnamese business managers in the city of Houston are the respondents for a purposive

population of a case study. The study will employ a mixed method of contemporaneous

qualitative and quantitative methods in order to yield richly descriptive and scientifically

valid data in the local businesses cultural context. As Creswell (2003) suggested, a mixed

methods purpose statement needs to convey both quantitative and qualitative purpose

statements. Combining qualitative and quantitative methodology in the case study helps

to advance understanding of the complexity of a research problem than either method

alone. When both quantitative and qualitative data are included in a study, researchers

may enrich their results in ways that one form of data does not allow (Brewer & Hunter,

1989; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). Using both forms of data allows researchers to

15

simultaneously generalize results from a sample to a population and to gain a deeper

understanding of the phenomenon of interest.

The qualitative methods will be in the form of semi-structured open-ended

interviews, which are used for gathering cultural dimensions and management factors.

Also observation is a primary source in data collection. The observer attempts to record

all relevant information in a unobstrusive way such as careful listening to pick up subtle

cues and nuances. Glesne and Peshkin (1992) explained that through participant

observation-through being part of a social setting-you will learn first hand how the

actions of your others correspond to their words; see pattern of behavior; experience the

unexpected, as well as the expected; and develop a quality of trust with your others that

motivates them to tell you what otherwise they might not (p. 39). The quantitative

methods will be in the form of questionnaires to identify cultural dimensions and

management attributes. The results of the two quantitative instruments will be arranged in

the form of numbers, which can be input into the software Statistical Package for the

Social Sciences (SPSS) and compared to previously published results. The relationships

of cultural dimensions and management attributes are examined in the contextual

framework of previous research which determined that cultural values influence preferred

management styles (Culpan & Kucukemiroglu, 1993; Bhaskaran & Sukuraram, 2007;

Herbert & Anvaar, 1998; Hofstede et al., 2002; Hofstede & Bond, 1998; Lung-Tan, 2006;

Munene, Schwartz, Smith, 2000; Prasad, S. & Babbar, S. (2000); Punnett, Dick-Forde,

Robinson, 2006; Ralston, Nguyen, Napier, 1999; Trompenaars, 1994).

The quantitative methods will consist of administering the two existing validated

instruments, the Values Survey Module 94 (VSM 94) (Hofstede & Bond, 1988) and the

16

Management Styles survey questionnaire Parts I and II (Culpan & Kucukemiroglu,

1993). In keeping with the case study protocol (Yin, 2003), the quantitative instruments

VSM (94) will be given first and then Part I and Part II of managers survey questionnaire

second following the oral interviews.

Rationale of the Study

The purpose of this research study is to describe and identify the cultural

characteristics and management styles among the Vietnamese businesses in the city of

Houston. The rationale for using human participants is the need to indentify their

perception of good and bad management behavior and to assess how those behaviors are

influenced by cultural dimensions. Hill (1993) advised that doing business in a different

culture requires adaptation to the value systems, beliefs, and norms of that culture. A

business that lacks cross-cultural literacy-sound knowledge about practices in the culture

is unlikely to succeed. Therefore, by studying culture and management, we will not only

increase understanding and appreciation cultural differences, broaden and deepen our

worldviews that stimulate our thinking and creativity in management functions, roles, and

skills, but also contribute to the broader literature on organizational culture and

management.

This study will add one piece to the growing mosaic of empirical evidence that

will yield a better understanding of how culture values may influence management styles.

It also provides an in-depth review of the development, evolution and management styles

of Vietnamese business in the city of Houston. As many Asian cultures share a number of

characteristics, the findings and conclusions of this research study will be a useful

17

foundation for conceptualizing further research on the topic of the interrelationships

between national culture and management practices.

Research Questions and Hypothesis

Two principal research questions serve to guide this study:

1. What are the culturally determined values of Vietnamese business

managers in the city of Houston based on the five dimensions of national

culture identified by the research of Hofstede (1984) and Hofstede and

Bond (1988)? These five dimensions are power distance, individualism,

masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, and long-term orientation.

2. What do the Vietnamese business managers in the city of Houston

consider constructive management, based on the six factors as articulated

by Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993)? The six factors are supervision

style, decision making, communication pattern, control mechanism,

paternalistic orientation, and interdepartmental relations.

The two research questions above represent various facets of the national cultures

and management styles to be explored. These two questions are fact oriented,

information-gathering questions that clarify the major objectives of this study, and hence

they are a critical influence to research design and strategies; data collection planning and

sampling schemes.

In addition to two research questions, a linear regression will be conducted to

assess if Vietnamese cultural influences on constructive management. There is one pairs

of hypotheses will be developed for testing as follows:

18

H0: Vietnamese cultural values do not predict each of the management style

subscales (supervision style, decision making, communication pattern,

control mechanism, interdepartmental relations, and paternalistic

orientation).

HA: Vietnamese cultural values do predict each of the management style

subscales (supervision style, decision making, communication pattern,

control mechanism, interdepartmental relations, and paternalistic

orientation).

The research design will be employed the used of mixed methods to collect data.

Use of mixed method is advantageous by gathering quantitative data through the used of

the VSM 94 and the Management styles Parts I and Part II surveys as well as gathering

qualitative information from interviews of Vietnamese business manager in the city of

Houston.

Studies conducted by Hofstede (1984, 2001) addressed similar questions but data

were collected quantitatively and aggregated for national samples and did not include the

country of Vietnam. A comparative study of the management styles in marketing studies

by Poon et al. (2005) included China but did not present intranational data. Although

many Asian cultures may share a number of characteristics that help describe, but not

defined, them. Poon et al. (2005) advised that it is possible to predict management style

differences based on cultural differences in a systematic way (p. 48).

19

Theoretical Framework

This study will provide significant insight into the cultural characteristics that

influence Vietnameses perceptions of what constitutes expected, acceptable and

effective management. Cleary, a number of sociological theories are capable of

explaining the behavior of human beings, and various business management theories

provide insight into the influence of cultural value systems. In order to provide insight

into how cultural characteristics influence management, two theoretical frameworks have

been selected to guide this study.

First, there are cultural dimensions which provided the cultural variables and

operationalized, for this study, Hofstedes (1984) and Hofstede and Bonds (1988) model

of the five cultural dimensions has been selected to examine the cultural values.

Examples of this type of research include the national culture (Mead, 1998; Park, Russell

& Lee, 2007; Kwok & Tadesse, 2006; Parboteeah et al., 2005; Smith, 1994), cross-

cultural research and the international relevance of management theory (Cooper &

Denner, 1998; Earley & Gibson, 1998; Inkpen & Beamish, 1994; Wright & Ricks, 1994).

Hofstede's framework has been used extensively in empirical research, partly because his

cultural dimension indices can be easily used as independent variables in statistical

analyses. In addition, the multiple-dimensions allow for much finer grained comparisons

than are possible when examining differences based purely on geography or the level of

industrialization. Using Hofstedes (1984) and Hofstede and Bonds (1988) theoretical

framework, helps to develop a mechanism to interpret the Vietnamese culture

characteristics.

20

Second, the concept of cross-cultural management provides the basis for

comparative management research directed towards the investigation of specificities of

management practices in different countries. Adler (1983) explains that:

Cross-cultural management is study of the behavior of people in organizations

located in cultures and nations around world. It focuses on the description of

organizational behavior within countries and cultures, on the comparison of

organizational behavior across countries and cultures, and, perhaps most

importantly, on the interaction of peoples from different countries working within

the same organization or within the same work environment (p. 226).

In cross-cultural management, a generally accepted idea appears to be that what

works in one specific cultural may not work in another. This observation captures the

underlying differences which separate the non-Western mind-set from the Western mind-

set. From this perspective, academic interest in comparative management grew strongly

during the last two decades, partly driven by the challenge of establishing ideas that

Japan's striking economic success seemed to offer. Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993)

stated that Comparative management has received a lot of attention over the last two

decades as global business has increased tremendously (p. 27). In discussing diversity in

management practices, Hofstede (1993) stated that The term comparative management

has been used since the 1960s (p. 82). For the purposes this study, the management

styles characteristics developed by Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993) will be selected to

focus on the direct effect cultural values have on Vietnamese management styles.

As discussed above, the two theoretical frameworks provide a foundation for this

study. The use of Hofstedes (1984) theory of culture is the primary theoretical construct

21

for the study of culture in this dissertation, although reference will be made to

management styles of the comparative management study (Culpan & Kucukemiroglu,

1993). Management styles are composed of the following theoretical constructs: Path-

goal theory of leadership (House & Mitchell, 1974); Seven S model (Pascale & Athos,

1981); theories X and Y (McGregor, 1960); theory Z (Ouchi, 1981). The components of

management theories will be discussed in chapter 2 of this study.

Construct Definitions of Management and Culture

Management. Management in the organization context may be broadly defined as

getting things done through other people. Managers make decisions, allocate resources,

and direct the activities of others to attain goals. For the purposes of this study, the

definition of organizational management used in the study of Management Scientists are

Human is selected. In the study of Management Scientists are Human, Hofstede

(1994) explained management, in part, as leading and coordinating the work of

employed persons should be geared to the collective mental programs of such persons,

that is their culture (p. 12). The author argued that management scientists are human,

and they grew up in a particular society in a particular period, and their ideas cannot

help but reflect the constraints of their environment (Hofsted, 1993, p. 82).

Culture. As with management, there are many definitions of culture in the

literature depending on the level of analysis and the purpose of the research. Hofstede

(1984) defined culture, in part, as the collective programming of the mind which

distinguishes the members of one human group from another (p. 21). In expanded

Hofstedes (1984) definition, Hofstede (1993) found, differences between nationalities

among individuals from different countries explained over 50% of the variance in

22

members' attitudes, values, and beliefs. The programming of the mind is composed of a

commonly held body of attitudes, values, and beliefs that defined what one should and

ought to do for those who hold them (Hofstede, 1984, p. 21).

Theoretical Model

The following model presents the relationships between cultural dimensions and

management styles factors which will be discussed in chapter 5.

Figure 1. Multidimensional analysis of the Management Styles Factors

Definition of Terms

The following technical terms which will be used throughout this dissertation are

defined as follows:

Culture Dimensions Management Styles

Power Distance

Individualism

Masculinity

Uncertainty Avoidance

Long-term Orientation

Supervisory Style

Decision-Making

Communication Pattern

Control Mechanism

InterdepartmentalRelations

Paternalistic Orientation

Culture Dimensions Management Styles

Power DistancePower Distance

IndividualismIndividualism

MasculinityMasculinity

Uncertainty Avoidance

Long-term Orientation

Supervisory StyleSupervisory Style

Decision-Making

Communication Pattern

Control Mechanism

InterdepartmentalRelations

Paternalistic Orientation

23

Cultural Differences: The term describes differences in the behavior of managers

by country of origin that each individual country maintains a unique set of characteristics

that will affect her or his decision-making.

Cultural Dimensions: This always refers to the national cultural dimensions

developed by Hofstede (1984) and Hofstede and Bond (1988) to measure the influence of

a persons national culture on their personal values. These five dimensions are power

distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, and long-term orientation.

Globalization: The term globalization here can be viewed as the world-wide

integration of economic, political and social activities, and information with common

norms and institutional framework to facilitate international cooperation. The progress

brought about by the enormous reduction of costs of transportation and communication,

and the breaking down of artificial barriers to the flows of goods, services, capital,

knowledge, and (to a lesser extent) people across borders (Stiglitz, 2002, p. 9).

Management Styles: This refers to a model consisting of six dimensions

developed by Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993) to measure the influences of a persons

management styles on their personal perceptions. The six dimensions are supervision

style, decision making, communication pattern, control mechanism, paternalistic

orientation, and interdepartmental relations.

Vietnamese Business: In this study refers to Vietnamese business managers in zip

code 77072 in the city of Houston. The selected managers will be those available during a

daily work period.

24

Assumption of the Study

The goal of this research study is highly specific, to contribute to an

understanding of the relationship between Vietnamese culture and management styles.

While many highly complex questions and issues are related to more philosophical

discussions of management and cultural differences, it is not the goal of this research

study to solve these questions and issues. The following assumptions are made in this

study:

1. Culture influences on management styles offers the conceptual power to

bridge the cultural gap between cultures and worldviews. Such a bridging

structure will allow managers from vastly different experiential contexts to

understand and appreciate cultural differences which results in greater

cooperation.

2. The respondents are able to accurately and honestly assess and provided their

subjective level of culture values, management, and managerial styles.

3. Managers understand the questions and the scales that are used in the survey.

4. Managers express different perceptions of constructive management attributes

due to the different efficiency management background.

5. Cultural backgrounds influence the perception of management.

6. The perception and interpretation of information by Vietnamese managers is

influenced by the national culture as defined by Hofstede (1984; 2001), and

by the management styles as defined by Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993).

25

Limitations of the Study

It should be noted that this study is specifically limited in scope to 12 Vietnamese

managers in the city of Houston. It is a case study bounded by the time of the interviews,

the location in the city of Houston, and the particular business and its managers. This

study cannot be thought to represent the experience of other Asian American businesses

in the city of Houston. Due to the fact that Hofstedes IBM data are old, a recent follow-

up to Hofstedes study found that transformational changes have made their way into

various cultural values (Fernandez et al., 1997). There is a need to conduct studies on the

cultural influences on management at the local level and for specific business segments.

The assessments are generalizable to the theoretical constructs of cultural

dimensions and management styles and therefore, the findings may not generalizable to

broader populations or other cultures. Cultures are made up of layers that influence and

are reflected in peoples behavior within a given nation. As defined by Schein (1985),

culture is an iceberg, with behaviors signaling the 10% visible part, and nonobservable

values and norms comprising the 90% below the surface (Rosinski, 2003). The reliability

of the study is, therefore, limited to the population at the time of the interviews. The

study of Vietnamese cultural characteristics and management will need to be repeated in

5 to 10 years given the continuing socioeconomic changes in the America, political

transition in Vietnam, and globalization.

Given the fact that this is a very large subject and there is a great amount of

literatures and theories about cultural characterization and management, there have to be

restrictions on information being used. In addition, in this study only self-reported

responses will be measured, rather than National Culture - Vietnamese actual

26

observations in the workplace. Therefore, the possibility remains that the research

methods of this study fail to fully capture all the cultural influences shaping Vietnamese

business managers cultural characteristics and concepts of management.

Organization of the Study

The dissertation is organized in five chapters. Chapter 1 presents an introduction

to the study and explains why understanding the relationship between cultural

characteristics and management is important. Chapter 2 presents the pertinent literature

and provides the theoretical context and framework for the study. Chapter 3 presents the

mixed method research design used in the study and describes the methods of data

collection and analysis. Chapter 4 presents the qualitative and quantitative results and the

analysis of the findings. Finally, chapter 5 summarizes the findings as well as states

conclusions stemming from the results and makes recommendations for further research.

The results are related to the existing literature and the social significance of the study is

discussed.

Summary

This chapter begins with establishing the subcultures point of view that is relevant

to the subject of management. The rationale for the study stems from the need to better

understand the cultural dimensions which determine what a constructive management is

in different countries in order to better manage workers in cross-cultural settings. The

national cultural differences may vary from those factors that are the visible part in the

iceberg metaphor, such as behaviors to those non-observable factors, such as attitudes,

27

values, and beliefs. The purpose and significance of the study presents the face-to-face

interactions at the local level in which managers of organization must interact to gain

deeper knowledge insight into Vietnamese characters. The theoretical constructs for the

study are a combination of the dimensions of cultural characteristics developed by

Hofstede (1984) and Hofstede and Bond (1988), and the management styles

characteristics developed by Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993). The qualitative

methodology in combination with the quantitative case study help to advance

understanding of the cultural complexity, and is appropriate for a close look at

Vietnamese values, attitudes, customs, and beliefs.

The next chapter will discuss the development of the theoretical constructs which

guided this study and the research relevant to cultural characteristics and management.

28

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

This chapter focuses on a review of the literature and provides the theoretical

constructs which form the frame of reference for a case study on Vietnamese cultural

characteristics and management in the city of Houston. The discussion of management

begins with an overview of effective management theories, concepts of management

styles, motivation theory, and factors of management styles. The relevant theoretical

bases of this case study are the administrative theory (Fayol, 1916), theory of

administrative behavior (Simon, 1958), theory of bureaucracy (Weber, 1958), theory of

scientific management (Taylor, 1947), theories X and Y (McGregor, 1960), theory Z

(Ouchi, 1981), achievement motivation theory (McClelland, 1961), and dimensions of

management styles (Culpan & Kucukemiroglu, 1993).

In addition, an overview of cultural characteristics are based on theory of culture

(Hofstede, 1984; Hofstede & Bond, 1988), cross-cultural research, GLOBE project

(House et al., 1999), value/belief theory (Hofstede, 1984), and some traits of the

Vietnamese culture (Pham, 1994; Puffer, 2004; Vuong, 1976).

The literature review is shaped by the variables of cultural values and

management styles as identified in the purpose and significant of study section of this

paper. The review of the literature relative to cultural characteristics is structured around

the five dimensions of cultural values developed by Hosftede (1984) and Hofstede and

Bond (1988). The literature on management focuses on management styles factors

29

developed by Culpan and Kucukemiroglu (1993), and management theories as a subset of

the broader field of management style factors.

Perceptions of Effective Management A Classical Perspective

The industrial revolution of the twentieth century stimulated many management

theories which described the modern business environment. These theories influence

supervision, management, administration, or leadership terms often used

interchangeably in the new patterns of thinking, the process of responding, and new ways

of managing people. Each theory reflects a unique set of roles and functions for the best

practices, principles and techniques in management that many modern managers and

practitioners use to support employees and improve the organizations business

operations. Frederick Winslow Taylor, Henri Fayol, Max Weber, and Herbert Simon

made major contributions to the theoretical foundation of contemporary management

practices.

Scientific Management

Frederick Taylor (1895), the Father of Scientific Management, believed that the

working environment contained a great deal of conflict and inefficiency because of poor

work design, lack of co-ordination and control, and poor employee commitment. Taylor

(1947) developed a method to analyze tasks performed by individual workers in an effort

to discover those procedures that would produce the maximum output with the minimum

input of energies and resources (Scott, 2003). An example of this theory is the assembly

line where individuals are assigned certain tasks requiring specific motions to perform

their small step in the overall process. His scientific management theory proposed to

30

rationalize the organization from the bottom up (Scott, 2003). Taylor believed that it is

entirely possible to scientifically analyze tasks performed by workers and that

understanding these procedures will help a company use resources more efficiently.

Analyzing and rationalizing labors at the individual task level will lead to changes in the

structure of work arrangements. Scientific management approaches help improve the

work process but ignore the aspects of individual experiences, traits, motivation, etc. that

contribute to the successful accomplishment of a task. The phrase "scientific

management" or Taylorism is seldom if ever used today. However, the principles of

scientific management are still relevant in helping many American companies define the

role of training, wage incentives, employee selection, planning and control in

organizational performance.

Administrative Theory

A French industrialist, Henri Fayol (1916), developed administrative theory

which is completely opposite of Taylors in its overall form. Where Taylor looks from

the bottom up, Fayol looks from the top down. Henri Fayol was the first to identify the

five functions of management: planning, organizing, commanding, directing, and

controlling. He proposed that organizations should operate in a hierarchical structure like

a pyramid, with no one person receiving orders from more than one superior (Scott,

2003). He identified two activities, coordination and specialization, as important

principles. Coordination activities would include the chain of command or the scalar

principle. This principle states that every worker should have only one immediate

supervisor; this is who they report to and receive orders from. This helps to pin

responsibility and fix errors in the system. In order for a manager to effectively manage,

31

the number of subordinates must be controlled. The principle proposes that subordinates

be given the authority to handle routine matters allowing managers and superiors to be

free to deal with exceptional situations. Although administrative theory was proposed

more than 90 years ago, the five functions of management have had a profound impact on

management thinking and practice over the years as a basic framework for describing the

tasks of management. This theory has the advantage of uniformity throughout the

organization; however, in the global business structure, this theory creates many

logistical problems.

Theory of Bureaucracy

A German sociologist/political economist, Max Weber (1958), developed a theory

of authority structures and described organizational activity based on authority relations

(Scott, 2003). Scott (2003) defines bureaucracy as "the existence of a specialized

administrative staff" (p. 41). The notion of bureaucracy was formalized by Weber; his

articulate writings helped to coalesce and interpret bureaucracy. Bureaucracy is a

particular type of administrative structure developed through rational-legal authority.

Weber stressed that the rational-legal form of authority was the most stable system for

both superiors and subordinates as it is more reliable and clear, yet allows the subordinate

more independence and discretion. Subordinates ideally can challenge the decisions of

their leaders by referring to the stated rules charisma becomes less important.

Weber promoted the pyramid-shaped structure and a strong chain of command,

emphasized functional separation within the organization, and methods and procedures to

guide the regular and continuous fulfillment of duties within the organization (Gerth &

Mills, 1946). Key to understanding Weber is his focus on authority, bureaucracy, and

32

feedback as expressed through criticism and appreciation (Scott, 2003). This theory

works well with a good enforcement mechanism. One positive aspect of this principle is

the advantage of removing disharmonious or conflicting guidelines from group tasks and

behavior through guidance by increasingly superior knowledge and skills. The theory

creates uniformity throughout the organization; however, the authoritys decision

becomes less relevant because one individual cannot understand all the technologies of

the job; therefore, this theory would lead to poor decisions and consequentially to poor

performances.

Theory of Administrative Behavior

Simon extended Taylors thesis by measuring personal efficiency in terms of how

efficiently the employee translates managements assigned goals and tasks into

quantitative results in terms of their assigned job function. He was the first theorist to

focus on process and methods of administration, not management like other theorist.

Simons focus tended to be more on the internal decision making which occurs within an

individual worker which brings him into an organization and keeps him actively engaged

within that organizational structure. Thus, Simon drew a conclusion that goals are

effective only in as much as they can influence the decision making of individual workers

(Scott, 2003). Simon went further and noted that decisions are made within a context of

role, thus individuals at the higher end of an organization tend to be focused more on

organizational decisions while those at the lower levels of an organization tend to carry

out the organizational tasks. His theory suggested a hierarchy of goals (Scott, 2003).

33

Simon, in essence, states decision makers perform in an arena of bounded

rationality and that the approach to decision making must be one of satisfying where

satisfactory rather than optimum decisions are often reached. Satisfying successfully

adapts to and is a realistic solution for the limited time and resources a manager has when

considering alternatives in the decision making process. The most important aspect of

Simon's work was the rigorous application of the scientific method. Reductionism,

quantification, and deductive logic were legitimized as the methods of studying

organizations. This theory is task oriented and is efficiently productive. However, it will

not work well with the situations where unforeseen circumstances occur, such as changes

in market, technologies, or personnel.

Management Styles Concepts

The way in which managers approach various situations and the behavior they

display towards subordinate staff in an organization is likely depend on their style of

management. A managers style is likely determined by the culture of the organization,

the situational applications, and the needs of his or her employees. There has been a

significant increase in the number of management theories over the past three decades.

However, McGregor (1960) and Ouchi (1981) described the traits that are necessary for

successful managers in todays management environment. The following concepts make

up the characteristics of managerial styles.

Theory X and Theory Y

In 1960, the psychologist Douglas McGregor proposed two distinct views of

management styles: a basically negative approach labeled theory X, and basically

34

positive approach labeled theory Y. Theory X assumes that employees are lazy and don't

want to work. It is the job of the manager to control worker performance through

intimidation, rigid work rules, and threats of discipline (Brozik, 1994, p. 4). McGregor's

theory X makes three basic assumptions: (1) The employees dislike work and, whenever

possible, will attempt to avoid it; (2) since employees dislike work, they must be coerced,

controlled, directed, and threatened or punished to get them to work toward

organizational objectives; (3) the employees prefer to be directed, wish to avoid

responsibility, lack ambition, and seek job security above ambition. If management holds

theory X assumption, it is likely to manage as follows: (1) Management directs

employees; (2) management is responsible for organizing, planning, coordinating, and

important decision-making; (3) it is managements responsibility to motivate employees

to work toward to the desired goals.

Theory Y, on the other hand, rests on a positive view of employees. Theory Y

assumes that employees are motivated and therefore, managers are seen more as coaches

and mentors who provide employees with opportunities to pursue career goals (Brozik,

1994, p. 4). McGregor's theory Y makes four basic assumptions: (1) Employees view

work as natural as play or rest; (2) employees who are committed to the objectives will

exercise self-direction and self-control; (3) commitment to objectives is a function of

rewards associated with their achievement; (4) the average worker can learn to accept and

to seek responsibility. If management holds theory Y assumptions, they are likely to

manage in predictable ways as follows: (1) Management can delegate important decisions

to employees at lower levels; (2) employees might be given the opportunity to make their

own decisions and implement their own ideas; (3) management establishes the right

35

working conditions, values the opinion of the employees, spends more time listening than

talking, looks for ideas from the bottom-up, but makes the final decision; (4)

management can trust employees.

McGregor believed that theory Y managers offer the "carrot" as opposed to the

"stick" shown by theory X managers (Brozik, 1994, p. 4). McGregor argued that

managers should free up their employees to unleash their full creative and productive

potential. As a result, employees working for a theory Y manager appear to be creative,

imaginative, and eager to satisfy personal work-ego objectives (Brozik, 1994, p. 4).

Theory Z

In 1981, William Ouchi proposed a theory Z style of management. Theory Z

represented a combination of American and Japanese management styles and is

sometimes called Japanese Management. Theory Z assumes that managers must be more

supportive and trusting of their employees, in order to receive the benefit of increased

participation in the decisions of the company. Theory Z managers view their employees

as equals; everyone is a part of the total work team (Brozik, 1994, p. 5). Specific

characteristics included in theory Z are long-term strategic vision that is made clear for

each employee, less specialized career paths, informal control, group decision making,

and a strong human resource management support system. This theory satisfies both

lower order and higher order needs. When management holds theory Z assumptions, they

are likely to manage in this style: (1) Managers are more supportive and trusting of their

employees; (2) emphasis on group decision-making and teams; (3) support for flexible

work schedules, and telecommuting.

36

While theory Z appears to be the management style of choice in the last two

decades, but the assumptions made about employees and as well as managers can be

applied in todays workplace. Sullivan (1983) argued that in the absence of strong

cultural forces to counter its influences, theory Z fosters an environment in which family

ties, traditions, and social institutions are all weak in their impact on individual behavior,

social cohesion, and social stability (p. 133).

Theories X, Y and Z postulate that the management styles have a strong influence

on the behavior of the employees in terms of creativity and innovation. These styles can

either facilitate or inhibit the promotion of innovative ideas, processes and practices. It is

important that managers have a highly developed sense of peoples perceptions and

understand the feelings of staff, their needs and expectations. There is no evidence that

either theory gives all the answers on how to motivate heterogeneous peoples (within a

single culture and nation, across nations) who have different needs, attitudes, values and

beliefs. The managers must, therefore, get to know more about cultural differences as

well as similarities in order to provide a climate conclusive to triggering the motivation

potential in people.

Achievement Motivation Theory

A Psychologist, David McClelland (1961), in his studies of managerial

motivation, he found that he was able to differentiate people with a high need to achieve,

a strong desire to succeed or achieve in relation to a set of standards, from people with a

low need to achieve. In contrast to theories that emphasized a hierarchy of needs (e.g.

Alderfer, 1969; Maslow, 1954), McClelland identified the three type motives of specific

37

needs: need for affiliation, need for power, and need for achievement. Each of these

needs bears some resemblance to needs discussed by Maslow (1954). One of the most

widely studied needs is the need for achievement. Understanding of this need has been

instrumental in helping organizations better match people with jobs and in redesigning

jobs for high achievement and consequentially leading to high performance. In addition,

McClelland and his associates successfully developed methods to help achievement

motivation trained individuals in developing countries to increase their achievement drive

(Hofstede, 1984). For instance, in India, people who underwent achievement training

worked longer hours, initiated more new business ventures, and made greater investments

in productive assets.

The need for achievement refers to the internal drive to excel or succeed, and has

been the subject of numerous studies (Spangler, 1992). Individuals with a high need for

achievement will exert a greater effort to perform than those with a low need to achieve.

They prefer job situations with personal responsibility and feedback for the outcomes.

People with a strong high need for achievement may express their desire to influence

others (McClelland, 1987). Conversely, McClelland (1985) argued that each need is a

predisposition within an individual that is only activated in the presence of specific

achievement incentives. This kind of