Exercise exploring cross cultural management theory and empirical evidence and applying this to the Nissan-Renault (Japan-France)
• Hofstede’s analysis includes graph and is kept brief and the student includes a few sentences of the limits of this tool to avoid sophisticated stereotyping at an individual level. Definitions of dimensions may be put in an Appendix. Student refers back to the chosen intercultural interaction.
• Clear analysis of the class resources addressing the following topics: Decision Making, Negotiation & Communication, Leadership to provide culturally intelligent advice. The student understands the practical implications for managers using class reading and he/she found practical examples from, for example, other brands or mergers, to illustrate the key message.
• Evidence of comprehensiveness (breadth and depth) of information. Any evidence found of cultural difference is relevant to the brief and is balanced. Not stereotypical. Student is able to synthesize materials the course to provide sound cross cultural advice that is culturally intelligent and useful for any bi-cultural/mixed cross cultural situation. For example, the student may do a comparison between rule-based vs. consequence based decision making, he/she explains BATNA and the issues related to intercultural communication and the student may refer to the GLOBE findings of universally desirable leadership behaviours to show subjectivity of management best practice.
• Conclusion is kept brief and could be used on its own by the reader if need be. The summary must reflect good business sense that is useful for managers and reflects cultural intelligence and sensitivity to the complex, globalised environment. Included key recommendations that are presented using bullet points and reflect the introduction and analysis. No new information should be presented in this section.
2. Include a short comparison using a tool like Hofstede’s work https://www.hofstede-insights.com/product/compare-countries/ analyzing the two countries or cultures so that you can do a benchmark analysis. You should also include a graph as shown in the lecture slides and ensure that you make the analysis relevant to the organisational challenge.
3. Analyse the critical incident in terms of the following key topics: Decision Making, Negotiation & Communication, Leadership & Cultural Intelligence. What does the executive team need to know about cultural differences here that goes beyond typically binary advice (e.g., “The Japanese bow and the Germans shake hands”?) and instead is a culturally intelligent analysis.
4. A conclusion evaluating the information presented and three key points of advice presented with bullet points.