Some cultural considerations for applying the Learning Organization model to Iranian organizations Seyyed Babak Alavi and John McCormick University of New South Wales, Australia Presented in 2003 Tehran International Management Conference
It has been argued that some management theories and models may not be universal and are based on some cultural assumptions. It is suggested that the effectiveness of the Learning Organization (LO) model across different countries may be associated with cultural differences in terms of some dimensions such as individualism, collectivism, power distance, and future orientation. Given that some Iranian managers have reported high levels of power distance and in-group collectivism and low levels of societal collectivism and future orientation in a recent cross-cultural study, it is argued that aspects of LO such as systems thinking, managing mental models, team learning, and developing shared visions, may face some problems in Iranian organizations. Some theoretical propositions are developed for further empirical investigations.
Keywords: Cross-cultural Management, Learning Organization, Power distance, Individualism, Collectivism Digitally signed by S.B. Alavi DN: cn=S.B. Alavi, c=IR, o=Sharif University of Technology, ou=Department of Management and Economics Reason: I am the author of this document Date: 2005.09.25 06:45:42 +04'30'
It has been argued that some psychological and management theories and models may not be universal and many, which have been developed in industrialized countries, are based on some cultural assumptions (Berry, Poortinga, Segall, and Dasen, 1992; Dastmalchian, Javadian, and Alam, 2001; Hofstede, 1980, 1993, 2001; House, Javidan, Hanges, and Dorfman, 2002; Leung and Bond, 1989). The term ‘etic’ has been proposed to identify those psychological processes of human beings, which are universal. In contrast, the term ‘emic’ has been suggested to classify those, which are culturally specific (Berry et al., 1992; Dastmalchian, et al., 2001; Triandis, 1995). For example, it has been found that leadership attributions can be classified into etic and emic categories (Dastmalchian, et al., 2001; House, et al., 2002). In addition, some have suggested that even similar psychological attributions across cultures may be manifested differently and be consistent with cultural factors (Berry et al., 1992). The emic and etic approaches suggest that the effectiveness of some theories or models to predict individuals’ behaviors may be culturally limited. It has been argued that organizational culture can be highly influenced by societal culture (Hofstede, 2001). People’s organizational behaviors may be partly related to their attitudes, beliefs, and values, which may be affected by some cultural factors (Markus and Kitayama, 1991; Triandis, 1995). In addition, researchers and management theorists understand organizational phenomena based, in part, on some assumptions related to their societies’ cultures (Hofstede, 1993, 2001). This suggests that aspects of some management theories and models, which have come from highly developed countries, may not be completely consistent with the cultural characteristics of other countries, and vice versa. This recognition has encouraged some researchers to examine some management theories and models from cultural perspectives. For example, Management by Objectives (MBO), Maslow’s Theory, Total Quality Management (TQM) and some leadership theories have
been culturally examined (e.g., Galperin and Lituchy, 1999; Hofstede, 1980, 1993, 2001; Perry, 1997). This paper, based on some past and recent cultural studies, argues that the efficacy of the Learning Organization (LO) model (Senge, 1990; Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, and Ross, 1994) across different countries may vary due to cultural differences. Some theoretical ideas will be developed for further empirical investigation. In addition, it...
References: Argyris, C., 1982, Reasoning, Learning, and Action: Individual and Organizational (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass). Argyris, C., 1999, On Organizational Learning (Massachusetts, Blackwell Publishers). 18
Argyris, C. and Schon, D., 1996, Organizational LearningΙΙ: Theory, Method, and Practice (New York, Addison-Weseley Publishing). Dastmalchian, A., Javidan, M, Alam, K., 2001, Effective leadership and culture in Iran: An empirical study, Applied Psychology: An International Review 50, 532-558. Earley, P. C. and Gibson, C., 1998, Taking stock in our progress on individualismcollectivism: 100 years of solidarity and community, Journal of Management, 24,265-304. Gudykunst, W. B., Matsumoto, Y., Ting-Toomey, S., Nishida, T., Kim, K., and Heyman, T., 1996, The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self-construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures, Human Communication Research, 22, 510-543. Harris, S. G., 1994, Organizational culture and individual sensemaking: A schema-based perspective, Organization Science 5, 309-321. Hofstede, G., 1980, Motivation, Leadership, and Organization: Do American Theories Apply Abroad?, Organizational Dynamics 9, 42-63. Hofstede, G., 1993, Cultural constraints in management theories, Academy of Management Executive 7, 81-94. Hofstede, G, 2001, Cultures Consequences (California, Sage Publications). House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., and Dorfman, P., 2001, Project GLOBE: An introduction, Applied Psychology: An International Review 50, 489-505. Johnson-Laird, P. N., 1983, Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press). Leung, K. and Bond, M. H., 1989, On the empirical identification of dimensions for crosscultural comparisons, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 20, 133-151. Markus, H. Z. and Kitayama, S., 1991, Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation, Psychological Review 98, 224-253.
Pfeffer, J., 1994, Managing with power: politics and influence in organization (Boston. MA, Harvard Business School Publishing). Richardson, G. P., 1991, Feedback Thought in social science and system theory (Pennsylvania, University of Pennsylvania Press). Schein, E. H., 1993, On Dialogue, Culture, and Organizational Learning, Organizational Dynamic 22, 40-51. Senge, P., 1990, The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. (New York, Doubleday Publishers). Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., and Ross, G., 1994, The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization (New York, Doubleday Publishers). Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Roth, G., Ross, R., 1999, The Dance of Change: The Challenges to Sustaining Momentum in a Learning Organization (New York, Doubleday). Strunk, D. R. and Chang, E. C., 1999, Distinguishing between fundamental dimensions of individualism-collectivism: relations to sociopolitical attitudes and beliefs, Personality and individual differences 27, 665-671. Triandis, H., 1995, Individualism & Collectivism (Colorado, Westview Press). Triandis, H. C. and Gelfand, M. J., 1998, Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism, Journal of personality and social psychology 74, 118-128. Trompenaars, F. and Hampden-Turner, C., 1997, Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business (London, Nicholas Brealey Publishing). Watson, W. E., Johnson, L., and Zgourides, G. D., 2002, The influence of ethnic diversity on leadership, group process, and performance: an examination of learning teams, International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26, 1-16. Yukl, G., 2001, Leadership in Organizations (London, Prentice Hall). 20
Please join StudyMode to read the full document