Understanding Culture Beyond the books

For cross-cultural managers it is important to be aware of the cultural philosophies of the different places where the engage in managerial activities. Not only in the case of South Africa and the Ubuntu Philosophy, but also everywhere else.

Taken from: Kanhyisela Scholarship Program Website, n.d. Ubuntu: The Legacy of South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu. Whiting, A. (Image). Available at: http://khanyisela.org/khanyisela-blog/south-africa-khanyisela-blog/ubuntu-the-legacy-of-south-african-archbishop-desmond-tutu/

The first thing that managers can do is to develop a great cultural sensitivity. As in the case explained in the essay of Mangaliso, M. (2001), managers cannot pretend that their culture will fit in every aspect with the culture of the host country. Taking a position based on ethnocentrism and stereotypes will never turn in results that benefit the organizations and its employees. Besides, culture can never be understood as a static feature of people within a group, so the tasks of managers in understanding foreign cultural philosophies is a never-ending one.

For starters, some degree of cultural dimension is a great first step to understand a different culture, and in cases like this where managerial teams are “imported”, it is difficult to make them interact with the host culture, especially since they are provided with all the facilities to “make them feel like home”, as in sort of a “bubble” that acts as an obstacle for a better understanding of the other. In the particular case of South Africa, the cultural learning of ubuntu cannot be learned just through books or through cultural analysis like those of G. Hofstede or of E.T Hall, but they are quite useful nonetheless. I would think, that since the document says they are a high-context culture (one of Mr. T. Hall’s features), a face-to-face interaction is crucial to understand that society in general terms. Therefore, communication and mutual understanding are key.

After that step is executed, the following would be to identify how the general understanding of a culture diverges or stays true to the core of a particular organizational culture. It might had been that the ubuntu characteristics call for a respect of authority from hierarchical figures, but in the case of the mining company it seemed like the employees wanted a more one-on-one contact with the management, and a more horizontal relation within the organization. The use of the “Onion” metaphor would certainly apply here, where after getting in touch with the superficial characteristics, the managerial teams would have to dive in to “the core” where main values are, in order to understand cultural philosophy.

One thing that has to be taken into account in that process of understanding is that, between cultures, some values just do not translate. In the case of the mining company, managers were pretending to use an indirect communication system and that went in complete contradiction of what the locals had accustomed. Also, the managers –who had a very western idea of management, had ignored the ideas of kinship, humaneness, welfare, consensus and harmony which were cornerstones of the ubuntu philosophy, while trying to impose their values.

In conclusion, understanding different cultures from the other’s shoes, and having an ongoing process of adaptation to managerial practices “exported” to other countries have to be founded in an open attitude towards change, suggestions, communication and comprehension.

NOTE: Sorry i had been away for so long, but between the midterm, and the two class activities that made up for the blog activities (Plus, plenty of things to do in other courses), a month has passed by sice my last post. I will try to make it up.