You are on page 1of 6

Running head: MANAGEMENT 1

The Macro- and Micro-Level Effects of Culture


School Affiliation

Author’s Note

This paper is prepared for by (insert name) for the completion of the requirement for the

course (insert course name)

the context of using the macro-level perspective in culture promotes a broader concept on how to interpret the problem.and Micro-Level Effects of Culture The global workplace is a diverse community because it not only follows rules that are regarded as company policies but also takes into consideration the various cultures that apply to its different organizational members. The conflict arose when Tapio confirmed to Bekverna that a new system would be installed on Midsummer. the technical specialist. the macro-level context of the tradition should be put on focus because it determines how the people understand its meaning and how they interpret it according to their societal needs. the email exchanges from Per Johnson. understands that this is a human resource conflict based on the email exchanges between Tapio and Per. In the case presented. The need to acknowledge both macro.and micro-level of theoretical perspective to gain insights on how to identify culture within an organization is necessary so that the management would understand and know the different processes to fulfill a harmonious and streamlined approach in solving workplace conflict or changes in the system. Robin knows that Per would not . The sales director. Therefore. using the macro. In understanding the situation. wherein Per does not approve of.and micro-levels of culture to identify its significance in understanding the different perspectives at work within the group. and Tapio Makela.and micro-levels of culture can determine how an individual or an organization manage and deal with different issues and concerns that are relevant to the group of the company as well as of its members and thus nurture harmonious productivity within the managerial and operative dimensions of the company (Daniels & Greguras 2014). Robin. Allowing a general knowledge about both macro. Since the main issue where the conflict originated is working on Midsummer. the managing director.MANAGEMENT 2 The Macro. which resulted in personal attacks on their respective works.

It is also relevant that the cultural dimension which Hofstede used to determine the macro-level of understanding culture is defined on the following factors: power distance. he believes that Per is attacking the way he manages Beukema’s system. Tapio may not have taken this macro-level of culture in consideration because he is from Finland and does not practice the tradition. In this perspective. and vice-versa. uncertainty avoidance. In this perspective. short-term (Nardon & Steers 2011). and both assumed that they would be followed promptly regardless of the differences. individualism-collectivism. In this context. Greer Hofstede’s identification of this difference is based on the context that “different cultures can be distinguished based on differences in what they value” (Nardon & Steers 2011. 4). it is evident that Per and Tapio conflict because they have a different understanding of Midsummer and what it implies according to their respective cultures. Midsummer is an essential holiday in Sweden because it signals the summer break for Swedish.MANAGEMENT 3 work during Midsummer because it is a holiday. masculinity-femininity. the difference between Per and Tapio delves on the macro- level because they do not understand the culture of each other. Therefore it is a tradition that is most respected and at the same time followed by the different members of the society. beliefs define the culture and traditions become the outputs of these beliefs. past and present orientations are more relatable to values and traditions as well as social obligations – such as celebrating the Midsummer as a holiday for Per. and long-term vs. Moreover. p. the element that puts the conflict more relevant is the way that Per and Tapio do not understand each other’s culture. and thus assume that they are attacking each other’s line of work and expertise. The traditional beliefs that each possesses based on their cultures are not aligned. Thus. Collectivism promotes a broader connotation on how it is employed in the cultural makeup of the society. In this context. .

While Per identifies that Bekverna’s system is not appropriate and is not effective. the case becomes more individualistic because it can be seen that Per and Tapio have different perspectives when it comes to the perpetuation and maintenance of the project as well as how Bengt tries to resolve the issue. while Per believes that his tradition and social obligation is not respected. (in Romani et al. the emic and etic models introduced by Morris et al. thus allowing a misunderstanding on both parts as they understand it in different values. their culture affect how they respond to situations. thus suggesting that conflicts in diversity are often related to these processes. Geertz (1995) asserted that culture has highly relevant effects on the way people conduct and behave themselves when it comes to a global workplace. The issue between Per and Tapio involves their initial reactions towards each perspective. tried to make the matter resolvable by promoting that the project should be started before the holidays. In this situation. 2014) suggests that the predefined concepts and dimensions of culture as well as the power distance which Hofstede’s theory posts on the macro-level defines how hierarchical power is determined in two different individuals. thus promoting balance between the . Robin’s associate. Bengt’s suggestion posits a different perspective as well. Most of the time. Tapio identifies that Per’s opinion is not relevant that he is not an expert to judge the situation. behaviors. Bengt Karlson. the idea that each has a set of personalities. In this individualist perspective. and attitudes affected by their culture posits a different perspective between Per and Tapio’s conflict. and that is to finish it before the holidays.MANAGEMENT 4 On the other hand. thus acknowledging the micro-level effects of culture in individual lives. which is more transformative and favorable to solve the conflict. The conflict only arises when Tapio felt that his works are being attacked. The context becomes more relevant when the organizational processes of finishing the task – which is installing the new system to Bekverna – is provided by Bengt.

create an understanding of how culture affects both individualistic and collectivist perspectives. while the emic processes of each according to his culture’s effects on behavior and personality. and Bengt’s suggestion indicates that a resolution is doable as long as the two employees would work past their differences and achieve on the shared goal to promote the company’s processes into fulfillment and success. In conclusion. the macro. creates their opinions which are misconstrued by each as a personal attack to their expertise and their work. beliefs. In light of the concept of macro. The idea that traditions. . and misunderstandings are often associated with this dimension (Romani et al. The association of an individual with their respective cultures.and micro-levels of culture’s effect on individuals and societies provide a better understanding of how culture affects situations. especially in global workplaces.MANAGEMENT 5 two clashing employees. and social obligations affect an individual’s response to a context because of the macro-level effect of culture makes the conflict relevant – working on Midsummer is not a practice in Sweden. the society. such as Tapio’s responses to Per. 2014). and the individual is affected mostly by how they perceive an acknowledgment of their culture or behavior as either an appraisal or an attack.and micro-levels of culture. such as Per and Tapio’s arguments against each other. This difference creates much of the conflict in a global workplace. wherein Robin has to determine the effects of the conflict between Per and Tapio which he must resolve. Hierarchy is also an essential factor in the case.

organizations and work. (2011). L. The culture theory jungle: Divergence and convergence in models of national culture. A. & Greguras. 1202-1229.) Culture. processes and outcomes. Journal of Management 40(5). in M. H. Primecz. Bhagat and Richard M.MANAGEMENT 6 References Daniels..and macro-level theories..43-62. There is nothing so practical as four good theories. p.) Global leadership practices: A cross- cultural management perspective. in Rabi S. & Bell. (1995). R.. (2014).. Exploring the nature of power distance: Implications for micro. Palgrave McMillan. & Steers. Nardon. Cales and B. Romani. L. Gherke (Eds.T. Cultures. J. R. doi: 10. Steers (Eds. C. M. . M. (2014). G.1177/0149206314527131. Geertz.