The_Role_of_Culture_in_Defining_Business_Management_Systems

The role of culture in defining business management systems Author: Luthor Tulip-Laine Culture plays an integral role in defining business management systems in both Asia and the West, clearly differentiating these types of systems even at a national level. In other words, while culture makes business systems different in Asia and the West, it also makes these systems different between countries, such as Japan and China. This essay will demonstrate what makes culture so important in helping us to understand the fundamental differences of business systems, on a national level, and in Asia and the West. Evidence will be provided about the importance of culture and its level of impact on business systems, as well as case studies and comparisons of Japanese, Chinese and American culture and their respective business systems. The cultural values, relations and structure of any nation in the world clearly affects how that society operates, and this is also apparent with any kind of modern business management system. It is therefore immediately apparent that culture influences business practices and, in effect, business management systems. To put it simply, business management styles are a by-product of national culture, as such, each type of management system is not much far removed from the other. In fact, we see such cultural aspects in almost any facet of society in any country, although that would be the topic of a different essay. Entire theses have been written around the idea that culture influences business systems. One such example is Kahn's 'Confucian Economic System', used to describe Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and Korea's cultural links to business practices. Kahn describes the features of these 'neo-Confucian' economies to be related to a number of factors, including sobriety, a high value for education, a desire to succeed, seriousness about life and a hard-working ethic. Hefner argued that culture could even be seen as such an omnipotent, powerful force that pervades society and affects business models and the national economy, in-line with the seemingly popular idea that culture affects society in such a manner. Hefner also suggested that culture and social relations were intrinsic to understanding the scope of business and economics on a national level, but not as a "free-standing social sphere". The idea that culture does actually influence society, and with it national markets and business systems to such an extent is given much credibility and is still the most popular one. Hefner based his theses of culture and business on the pretext that our concept of culture is intended to be an interactively 'constitutional' one, explaining that rather than being separate from politics, economics and other social spheres, that it was a meaning-making medium that interacted with these elements. Take Japan as one example, a very unique country, with a culture that does not completely resemble that of any other one nation, although much has been borrowed much from other countries by Japan to construct its own national identity. For instance, the most challenging explanation of the Japanese economic 'miracle' of the late 20th century has been attributed to the Japanese cultural tradition itself, identifying the Japanese culture with Japan's economic success. Morishima, following the social theory of Max Weber, argued that the economic 'miracle' was as a result mainly because of Japan's Confucian tradition, using Weber's premise that religious and ethical systems shape human economic behaviour and consequently the nature and performance of their economies. Confucianism plays an important role in Japanese culture and effectively, its society, business practices and so on. Although Confucianism originated in China, China does not share the same ingrained Confucian value system that can be seen clearly in Japanese business systems. That is because Confucianism is not as central to Chinese culture as it is in Japan. This explains why China is so different in economic terms to Japan, as Morishima argued that the form of Confucianism that developed in Japan was substantially different to that of China, as there was produced in Japan a totally different national ethos from that prevailing in China. Many countries in Asia and the West have attempted to emulate Japan's success in the late 20th century, to little avail. This is because, as the Japanese understand, that no-one except the Japanese can understand their unique way of life. Nobody can be a real Japanese unless they were born in Japan and raised in a Japanese family. It is because of that belief that we can understand why culture itself is so important in understanding not just society in general but the way in which people of different cultures conduct business. Kim argues that the corporate culture of Korea was created as a result of the strategic style of business management and sub-culture in Korean companies, claiming that corporate culture is defined as the sum total of values, beliefs, habits, traditions and norms that are shared by any one organization in Korea, along with the worker's collective knowledge and skills. If we look at where these sub-cultures of values, beliefs and so on are a product of, we shall see that they are components of the Korean culture and tradition itself. Therefore, the corporate culture of Korea is created from, and influenced heavily by the Korean national culture and tradition. It would be implausible to suggest otherwise. Business systems in the West are shaped by cultural traditions, on a national level, as well. Take for instance, the relationship between the United States and Mexico. As business people in the United States have become aware of the differing levels of importance placed on 'time' in Mexico and the US, we can see how national culture and traditions shape the way business is conducted in these countries. The Mexicans tend to prioritise family and social obligations before business, something that the business people of the United States have difficulty coming to terms with when dealing with the Mexicans. This is another example of how culture on a national level explains the different ways that business is conducted. The way that business people from the United States conduct business is of course also very different to the way the Asians handle it. One such example of this is how the state and law play roles in these countries. In the United States, for example, large business deals are struck after much legal scrutiny and paperwork, whereas in China little more than a mutual trust and acquaintanceship is required. The law and state play a small role in capitalist societies of the China, when compared to countries such as the United States. This may be variably different still from other countries such as Japan and Indonesia, where different cultural values and traditions also exist. Probably the most outstanding difference of all business systems in Asia and the West may be the Asian concept of business networks, a concept based on the result of the combination of guanxi and guanqin, both Confucian values seen predominately with Chinese companies but also other parts of East and South-East Asia. It seems that Westerners are becoming more aware recently of such concepts and are now coming to terms with them. In conclusion, by addressing the issue of how culture plays a role in explaining the differences between business systems in Asia and the West, we find that culture itself is a kind of constitutional framework, or 'operating system' to use McKenna's description, in which various social spheres, including the economy, market and with them business systems operate not only on a regional level but also at a national level. Culture is very important and to understand any particular nation's culture, one may achieve success in achieving a at least a basic understanding of how different business systems operate both in Asia and the West