Defining Management Style

Management style is defined as “a recurring set of characteristics that are associated with the decisional process of the firm or individual managers” (Tull and Album, 1971; Album et al, 1995). Several studies indicate that five cultural dimensions (Hofstede, 2001) significantly impact management styles. These are individualism, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity, power distance and long-term orientation (Birnbaum-More et al, 1995; Hofstede, 2001; Robertson, 2000; Westwood and Posner, 1997).

Previous research identifies high individualism, medium uncertainty avoidance, high masculinity, low to medium power distance and medium long-term orientation as the dimensions describing German characteristics, while low individualism, low

uncertainty avoidance, high masculinity, high power distance and high long-term orientation describe the Chinese (Hofstede, 2001; Westwood and Posner, 1997). Therefore, Germans display greater levels of individualism and uncertainty avoidance compared to the Chinese, while the latter exhibit greater levels in masculinity, power distance and long-term orientation.

Tse et al. (1988) compared managers from China, Hong Kong and Canada on decisiveness, choice and risk adjustment in simulated international business situations to determine how significantly their home culture affected their decision-making in risky circumstances. Differences in decision-making styles were most pronounced between Canadian managers with their western orientation (individual initiative and utilitarian values) and the group from China and their Confucian perspective of societal well-being and committee submission to leaders. Decision-making styles of managers from Hong Kong were found to be in between those of the Canadian and the Chinese. Once again, these results were attributed to the cultural impact of Eastern and Western ideas, as will be supported by some key findings of this study.

Literature offers evidence that managers from high individualistic countries such as the United States, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and Germany usually favour a democratic or participative style of management. Managers from low individualistic countries like the PRC, Hong Kong and Taiwan prefer an autocratic style of management (Birnbaum-More et al., 1995; Westwood and Posner, 1997).

This is further confirmed by an analysis of the responses of the partner-firm managers who participated in this study, when asked to identify facets of management styles.

Culture, therefore, has everything to do with the manner in which people exchange information, and how they learn and develop. When partner-firm managers share a similar culture, they are in a better position to facilitate a fit in management styles. An effective management style across cultures differs from an effective management style in a single culture, because of the differences in assumptions made by people from different cultures. To help facilitate a fit in management styles between cultures, managers must be aware of, and understand, these different assumptions, and their cultural impact on management styles.

For the purpose of this study, the acknowledged definition of management style is the pattern of behaviour associated with the decision-making process of an organisation, acquired and transmitted over time, both shared within a group and communicated to new members in order to serve as a cognitive guide or blueprint for future decision-making (Littrell, 2002).

Cultural values and norms are the building blocks of management style. While values embody abstract ideas of what a culture believes to be good, right and desirable, norms refer to the social rules and guidelines prescribing appropriate behaviour in a specific culture.

It is customary for German IJV managers to believe that Chinese managers deviate from the corporate cultural norm, while overlooking or ignoring, the fact that they themselves are the ones deviating from the norms of the host country. Ethnocentrism, the belief that one’s own ethnic culture is superior, is as damaging to the German managers of partner-firms, as is a total disregard or contempt for the Chinese culture. Cultural sensitivity and empathy are important concepts in management styles across cultures. These concepts are difficult to teach, but IJV partner-firm managers, through increased awareness and the use of cross-cultural training, can learn how to effectively bridge the cultural differences encountered in Sino-German IJVs.

Literature suggests that it is important for German managers to understand how their personal management style is influenced by their own culture, in order to understand how the Chinese culture influences the management styles of their Chinese counterparts. Most managers, particularly if they have limited or no experience of another culture, do not realise that their beliefs, values and management styles are not universal. Should German partner-firm managers be unaware of their own cultural bias, and the fact that their management style, in the context of the IJV, is a potential liability, they run the risk of facing major challenges in relation with facilitating a fit in management styles with their Chinese counterparts.

While previous research offers a number of concepts and frameworks (Hall, 1990; Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars, 2000; Schwartz, 1999; House et al., 1999;

Birnbaum-More et al., 1995; Westwood and Posner, 1997; Hofstede, 2001), they do not take into account the cross-cultural context of the German and Chinese cultural backgrounds. Therefore, this study, through a series of preliminary explorative interviews, focuses on identifying facets of management styles specific to Sino- German IJVs. These preliminary interviews were conducted with the partner-firm managers of the five participating Lufthansa IJVs in China. During the interviews, the managers provided valuable information on the different management style facets prevalent in their organisations.

The subsequent sections present a framework for management style dimensions, clustering the management style facets identified during the preliminary interviews. These use the dimension categories advanced in the framework conceptualised by Albaum and Herche (1999) for their study of management styles across cultures