I wanted to write today about Japan and its culture and how the Japanese do business with the world. Doing business in Japan may be different than doing business anywhere else in the world. While writing this as an American we are used to our own cultures and ways of life, but to step back when thinking of doing business in another country, you have to understand that “You’re not in Kansas anymore.” Sometimes people do things in life just to do them with no reckoning or reasoning; they just do them every day, the Japanese almost always have a reason for every single thing that they do in life. Moran, Abramson, and Moran (2014) Sets the tone for us by saying for centuries the Japanese lived by a “feudalistic ways of life you were obedient and loyal”(p. 432) to your server, and any dishonor to your server or yourself could lead towards a self-done suicide, which would be the only way to bring honor to your name.

Moran, Abramson, and Moran (2014) for decades the Japanese people have been working towards being a world superpower, since 1952 when America left Japan after its occupation of its country since World War II and was named an independent state. Japan has worked itself back to being a great industrial power and one of the highest economies in the world, and also heavily involved in the international space program. In one example of the culture of Japan Sally Herships (2015) states that “At a dinner meeting in Tokyo recently, where a lot of business happens over meals, two Japanese professors, Ryo Sahashi, an associate professor of international politics at Kanagawa University, and Satoru Mori, from the department of global politics, faculty of law at Hosei University, arrived and sat down at their booth. Even though it meant one of them would shortly have to get up to make room for one of their colleagues, who had yet to arrive, they left the middle seat between them empty. It might have seemed like a random decision; it was anything but. The explanation, says Toshihiro Nakayama, a professor of policy management at Keio University and the third and last to be seated, is simple. In Japan, the center seat is reserved for the most senior person, in this case, him”.

Something of this example shows how the thinking is in Japan there is always a reason for what is done. This type of culture also fits in with how the business is done in Japan as well, how the Japanese do business and how Americans do business are two different types of ways to do business. While Americans can be direct and expect answers immediately, the Japanese take their time and think about every angle to prepare for their step in doing business with you or doing business without you. If you offer them a product, you should not expect an answer of yes or no if they like your product, so an answer of “Oh that’s a good idea. Let us think about it” (Herships, 2015).

Moran, Abramson, and Moran (2014) go on to state “The dominate Japanese ethos includes familial relationships, loyalty, conformity, and the collective good. Japanese personality is generally self-confident and flexible, demonstrating a sense of order, propriety, and appropriate behavior. There is a tendency towards diligence and thrift, balanced by a fun-loving approach, which at times, seems almost frivolous and extravagant. In the outlook, the Japanese are cautious and given to stalling tactics. They are also insular, which is manifested by the in-group tendency. Japanese value peace, harmony, and economic progress ensured somewhat by the fact that only 1 percent of the nation’s gross national product is devoted to defense spending” (p. 437).

 

Herships, S. (2015, August 11). Etiquette and Rituals Rule in Japan’s Business Culture. Retrieved April 13, 2019 from https://www.marketplace.org/2015/08/11/world/etiquette-and-rituals-rule-japans-business-culture

Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2014). Managing cultural differences. Global leaders, culture, and a changing world. (9^th ed.). Oxford: Routledge.

For my third blog entry I thought I would write about the South American and Central American countries. Some of the common norms of today that we do to communicate can be interpreted in a different in a way with each different country. While working at the restaurant that I work, sometimes communication is often a problem because there are a few different employees that have come from different countries. The employees that work in my restaurant can all speak English but to what degree is the difference in understanding what they are saying. Some of the communication problem according to Moran and Abramson (2014) states “ The real difficulties in cross-cultural communications may be occuring because value systems are in conflict. While North and South Americans at a Pan-American conference, for instance, may be in agreement on general goals, the conflict might be anticipated in the means to achieve such goals; that is, the time, place, division of labor, sequence of actions, and other factors. When on is not open to consideration of the other’s values, then emotions may rise and disagreements increase”(pg. 360).

With that said it tells me that people can have the same goals in mind but from the point of agreement in goals to the point of achieving those goals may be an entire new undertaking all by itself. It happens often in the kitchen when chefs who do not speak english very well know what we have to do, but the steps to reach our goal is sometimes hindered by who does what, when they do what they have to do. Many times we have to take our conversations to our kitchen office where there is no noise and we can have a slow conversation that everyone understands what we are going to do.

Another part of working with employees from different countries is the authoritarianism. This is also something that is not always the easiest of things to do because you can not want to give the wrong meaning to what you are saying or asking. (Moran and Abramson, 2014). So by your body language, tone of voice, and volume of voice it can be the difference of someone that speaks a different language interpret something is just a simple question to a person of a different language thinking you are mad at them or disappointed with them.

According to Rebecca Bernstein (2017) she states that “To further understand the nuances of nonverbal communication across cultures, it is important to know the differences between “high-context” and “low-context” cultures. Context refers to the information that surrounds an event and is tied up with that event’s ultimate meaning”. So when dealing with different cultures it is important know how much information and what is really going on with the event.
In “high-context” and “low-context” cultures Bernstein ( 2017) goes on to state that “ High-Context communication tends to be indirect, harmoniously structured and understated. In conversation, people are expected to speak one after another in an orderly, linear fashion. Disagreements are personally threatening, it is important to solve conflict immediately or avoid it completely in order for work to continue. Accuracy is valued, how well something is learned is important. Verbal messages are indirect, speakers often talk around a point ( instead of directly to it) and use embellishments to convey meaning. Some countries considered “high-context” include Japan, Greece, and various Arab nations. In “Low-Context” communication tends to be linear dramatic, precise and open. Because words are so highly valued, they are used almost constantly. Disagreements are depersonalized, conflicts do not have to be resolved immediately for work to continue, when solutions are found, they tend to be rationally based. Privacy and personal space are highly valued, physical space is considered privately owned. Verbal messages are explicit and direct, words are valued above their context. Speed is valued, how efficiently something is done is important. Some countries considered “low-context” include United States, Germany, and various Scandinavian countries”.

One of the next forms of communication is the nonverbal communication that is performed during business. In differently countries that may happen very often and very easily. According to Bernstein (2014) she states “ Nonverbal communication can take many forms. Effectiveness as an international professional often hinges on understanding what these forms might be and how their meanings may differ between countries. One of the first is Eye contact it is taken into many different meanings in different countries especially in Asian cultures, avoiding eye contact is seen as a sign of respect.
However, those in Latin and North America consider eye contact important for conveying equality among individuals. Touch in America for example, using a firm handshake is considered appropriate to greet a stranger or another business professional. In France, however , it is common to kiss someone you greet on both cheeks. In the Middle East, the left hand is customarily used to handle bodily hygiene. Therefore, using that hand to accept a gift or shake a hand is considered extremely rude. Gestures are also considered differently in different countries. In the United States showing the OK sign to convey that something is acceptable. In Japan, that same hand hand symbol means “meaning”. In Argentina, Belgian, and France and the Portuguese all use the same symbol to mean “zero” or nothing. With facial expressions winking is a facial expression particularly varied in meaning. In Latin America, for example, the gesture is often considered a romantic or sexual invitation. The Chinese considered the gesture rude while the Yoruba people of Nigeria wink at their children if they want them to leave the room”. All of these nonverbal types of communication has a different meaning for each country. So learning about these things before you do business with someone from this country may benefit you to start on a good foot.

 

 

 

Bernstein, R. ( 2017, March 20). 7 Cultural Differences in Nonverbal Communication. Retrieved March 1, 2019 from https://www.online.pointpark.edu/business/cultural-differences-in-nonveral-communication/

Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2014). Managing cultural differences. Global leaders, culture, and a changing world. (9th ed.). Oxford: Routledge.

I was thinking of a topic to talk about for my second blog and thought about the Women Global leaders that we discussed in chapter 5 a few weeks ago. I find this topic very interesting because in the 1800s compared to today how wrong people were thinking for so long. Today I still find it hard to understand how the world must have been for women when a woman was prone to illness and would automatically be considered unfit for job positions especially in the political world of careers Gottfried (2013). What were some of the precedents that led to gender-stereotypical images of women? I believe up until the major changes made for women in the 1900s it was an entire buildup of precedents for women, who were barely given an education unless you were a upper-class woman, women did not have hardly any rights at all at the time, even a middle-class man that married a rich woman would become a rich man from all of her inheritance that was hers would become his.

According to Griselda Pollock (2014) “Women became a renewed topic for art and history, giving rise to gender analysis of both artistic production and art historical discourse. Gender is to be understood as a system of power, named initially patriarchal and also theorized as a phallocentric symbolic order”. I can only imagine what women must have felt like in the 1800s to be married and not have any say at what happens in your family. To not be able to say anything of your child’s punishment for doing something wrong, where your child may go to college, who your daughter may marry, these typical things a woman had no say over what happened the final decision was made by the husband and father.

Every country has standards that have a spot where a woman is set to be at power, some countries that spot is at the highest of positions and some countries it is believed that there is only a certain amount of power that a woman can reach and that is it.  In most Arab countries most women do not work according to Moran and Abramson (2014) “The proportion of women relative to men, both working in employed positions, varies globally, and ranges from 20 percent in Arab countries like Bahrain, Qatar, Iraq, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, to 50 percent in countries like Cambodia, Ghana, and Latvia, to much higher in the United States, Canada, and many European countries” (pg.141).

In the United States today women represent more than 50 percent of the workforce, but it has not always been this way. Some of the triggers that caused a higher demand for women in the workforce in America were the Industrial Revolution where companies were building huge plants for making thousands of different items for sale. The demand was for cheap labor, and this caused the need for more workers which lead to more women in the workforce and also children that should have been in school, but families needed the money to survive. The second trigger that caused more women into the workforce was the World War II demand of millions of women workers. Because almost all the men were overseas fighting in the war, which caused all of these women to become workers making tanks, ships, planes, any possible item that could be used in the war women were in factories making these items. After the war, some women were married and had children and families and never entered the workforce, but a large part stayed in the workforce which also kept it on the rise to today’s large amount that provides our large amount of women in the workforce.

The future for women in the workforce I believe will only continue to rise and with the internet and technology today it may make it easier for a woman to work from home or only have to work in an office a few days a week, which would make it easier for a woman to raise children or any other household work. According to Moran and Abramson (2014) “Careful observation reveals a rapidly increasing number of countries and companies moving away, for the first time, from their historical men-only pattern of senior leadership. The question is no longer “is the pattern changing?” but rather “ which companies will take advantage of the trend, and which will fall behind?” which companies and countries will lead in recognizing and understanding the talents that women bring to leadership, and which will limit their potential by clinging to historic men-only patterns…” (pg.165).

 

Gottfried, H. (2013). Gender, Work, and Economy: Unpacking the Global Economy. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press

Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2018). Managing Cultural Differences (9thth ed., pp. 140-169). N.p.: Routledge.

Pollock, Griselda. (2014). Women, Art, and Art History: Gender and Feminist Analyses. Retrieved February 23, 2019 (http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199920105/obo-9780199920105-0034.xml

 

In the world that we live in today having the mindset of being prepared for any foreseeable crisis that may happen is something that few have done or willing to do. The managers of restaurants also fall into this as well. Since working as a chef for a restaurant that this is the topic that we would look into and would write. In the restaurant that I am currently working at being prepared for any crisis that may be looming in the future is something our managers do not care to prepare for nor may I say care. As being one of the ones in charge of the kitchen our idea on the foreseeable crisis is something we try to take care of before it happens. According to Moran and Abramson (2014) “Anticipatory change is the awareness that a company’s strategy has reached its potential limits to growth. Performance is still rising but at a slower rate. Resistance to the possibility of change is likely to be higher than in reactive or crises. The general feeling may be that growth has slowed because of macro-economic factors and not because the company’s competitive position has eroded. Or senior managers may simply be swept away by their feelings of success and invincibility, and not be watching closely enough” (p. 108).

The one way that is the strategy for a foreseeable or non-foreseeable crisis is by having plans made out on how to deal with specific crisis’s that may happen. If it is a possibility of cutting hours down with kitchen and dining staff, it is laid out that a certain amount of help will have hours cut down, having kitchen and dining staff that will be on call one week and it will rotate to the next week. By doing so, our staff will not be losing the same amount of time each week and will not be the same staff that loses time. So instead of the same employee having hours reduced from working one-hundred and sixty hour month to a one-hundred hour month, this employee would have hours only reduced to one-hundred and thirty hour month. Also to note that any employee that is on call is also paid but not at their normal salary, so this is also paid that is helpful when the time is being reduced. According to Moran and Abramson (2014) “The lesson here about learning to respond to the need for change is that it is best to do so earlier rather than later. This is true even though there will be greater resistance to change as long as managers can fool themselves into thinking things are still ok” ( p. 109).

The better you can prepare yourself for a crisis the better you have a chance of survival. By looking at plans in every possible angle, it would also help prepare yourself and company for something coming to your company. For sure there are some things that you cannot see coming, and when this happens, you can only look at your preparations and make a hurried change to keep you company afloat, while you can make better changes for the future of your company. Something also stated by Moran and Abramson (2014) states“ In today’s changing culture, people are also challenged to alter the way they perceive or think about their work and how it is to be performed. The shifting context to the work environment has been described as the new work culture. The driving forces behind these social and technological changes are given below

1. Globalization of markets, consumerism, and workforces.
2. Tranaformation of traditional organizational hierarchy into a more participative, multi-national, or global network.
3. Fragmentation of work, and creation of a global job market.
4. Ascendancy of knowledge and information services as primary global products.

One outcome of such trends is the reshaping of views of our various roles in the family, community, or workplace”(p. 131).

 

 

Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2018). Managing Cultural Differences (9th ed).     Routledge.