FINAL ASSIGNMENT

COURSE:
MULTI-CULTURAL AND TRANSNATIONAL MANAGEMENT
(INE 3223 E*)

Instructor: MA. Nguyen Thi Phuong Linh

Name of student: Bach Huy Tien

Date of birth: 23/01/2003

Student ID: 21051032

Hanoi, 2024
Course: Multi-Cultural and Transnational Management (INE 3223 E*)

Student

Name: Bach Huy Tien (21051032)

Number of pages

……. (Excluding Title page, Table of Contents, and Appendices)

Module instructor

MA. Nguyen Thi Phuong Linh

Date of submission:

Plagiarism statement

“I confirm that this assignment is entirely my own work and has not been submitted
in full or in part for any other course within or outside UEB. I confirm that all
references are duly acknowledged.”

Signature:
Part 1: Essay
In the current era of globalization, cultural diversity is an inevitable and
essential aspect of management activities in general. Cultural diversity refers to
the variety of cultural backgrounds, values, beliefs, norms, and practices that
exist among people in a given context. Cultural diversity can have both positive
and negative impacts on management activities, depending on how it is
managed and leveraged.
There are many ways of examining cultural differences and their impact
on international management. Culture can affect technology transfer,
managerial attitudes, managerial ideology, and even business-government
relations. Perhaps most important, culture affects how people think and behave.
In overall terms, the cultural impact on international management is
reflected by basic beliefs and behaviors. Here are some specific examples where
the culture of a society can directly affect management approaches:
∙ Centralized vs. decentralized decision making. In some societies, top managers
make all important organizational decisions. In others, these decisions are
diffused throughout the enterprise, and middle- and lower-level managers
actively participate in, and make, key decisions.
∙ Safety vs. risk. In some societies, organizational decision makers are risk-
averse and have great difficulty with conditions of uncertainty. In others, risk
taking is encouraged and decision making under uncertainty is common.
∙ Individual vs. group rewards. In some countries, personnel who do outstanding
work are given individual rewards in the form of bonuses and commissions. In
others, cultural norms require group rewards, and individual rewards are
frowned on.
∙ Informal vs. formal procedures. In some societies, much is accomplished
through informal means. In others, formal procedures are set forth and followed
rigidly.
∙ High vs. low organizational loyalty. In some societies, people identify very
strongly with their organization or employer. In others, people identify with
their occupational group, such as engineer or mechanic.
∙ Cooperation vs. competition. Some societies encourage cooperation between
their people. Others encourage competition between their people.
∙ Short-term vs. long-term horizons. Some cultures focus most heavily on short-
term horizons, such as short-range goals of profit and efficiency. Others are
more interested in long-range goals, such as market share and technological
development.
∙ Stability vs. innovation. The culture of some countries encourages stability
and resistance to change. The culture of others puts high value on innovation
and change.
These cultural differences influence the way that international
management should be conducted.
On the positive side, cultural diversity can enhance creativity, innovation,
problem-solving, decision-making, and teamwork in management activities.
Diverse perspectives and experiences can generate new ideas, solutions, and
strategies that can improve organizational performance and competitiveness.
Cultural diversity can also foster learning, cross-cultural communication, and
mutual understanding among managers and employees, which can improve
organizational culture and climate.
On the negative side, cultural diversity can also create challenges,
conflicts, misunderstandings, and inefficiencies in management activities.
Cultural differences can cause communication barriers, mistrust, stereotyping,
prejudice, and discrimination among managers and employees, which can
reduce organizational effectiveness and productivity. Cultural diversity can
also increase complexity, ambiguity, and uncertainty in management activities,
which can make coordination, control, and evaluation more difficult.
Therefore, managing cultural diversity is a critical skill for managers in
the current era of globalization. Managers need to be aware of their own cultural
assumptions and biases, as well as those of others. Managers need to respect,
appreciate, and value cultural differences, as well as seek common ground and
shared goals. Managers need to adopt inclusive, participatory, and collaborative
approaches to management activities that involve diverse stakeholders.
Managers need to promote a culture of diversity that encourages openness,
dialogue, feedback, and learning. By doing so, managers can harness the
potential benefits of cultural diversity and minimize its potential drawbacks in
management activities in general.
First, I will go through Geert Hofstede and the Hofstede model. Gerard
Hendrik (Geert) Hofstede (born 2 October 1928) is a Dutch social psychologist,
former IBM employee, and Professor Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology
and International Management at Maastricht University in the Netherlands,
 He is best known for developing one of the earliest and most popular
frameworks for measuring cultural dimensions in a global perspective.
Hofstede originally identified four dimensions for defining work-related
values associated with national culture: power distance, individualism,
uncertainty avoidance, masculinity. A fifth dimension, long term orientation and
a sixth dimension, indulgence versus restraint were added later. He devised the
Values Survey Module for use in researching cultural differences, and this has
been used by many other researchers in their work. There are six dimensions for
the Hofstede Model.

Power Distance (PDI): This dimension reflects how hierarchical a society

is, with high PDI cultures having more rigid social structures and strong
deference to authority, while low PDI cultures emphasize greater equality and
less formality.

Individualism (IDV): This dimension concerns the tendency of a society

to prioritize individual needs and goals over those of the group. Individualistic
cultures value independence and self-reliance, while collectivistic cultures
prioritize group harmony and loyalty.

Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI): This dimension measures a society's

tolerance for ambiguity and unstructured situations. High UAI cultures seek
clear rules and regulations to reduce uncertainty, while low UAI cultures are
more relaxed and adaptable.

Masculinity (MAS): This dimension reflects the values a society places

on achievement, ambition, and assertiveness. Masculine cultures emphasize
competition and success, while feminine cultures prioritize relationships and
quality of life.

Long-Term Orientation (LTO): This dimension concerns a society's focus

on the future versus the present. Long-term oriented cultures value thrift,
perseverance, and planning for the future, while short-term oriented cultures
prioritize enjoying the present and immediate gratification.

Indulgence (IND): This dimension reflects a society's attitude towards

sensory enjoyment and leisure time. Indulgent cultures are more relaxed and
open to enjoying life's pleasures, while restrained cultures place greater
emphasis on self-control and discipline.
 The Hofstede model is a framework that describes the cultural
dimensions of different countries based on six factors: power distance,
individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, and
indulgence. This model can influence the management activities in various
ways, depending on the country's culture. Here are some examples of how the
Hofstede model influences management activities in Japan in real life:

- Power distance: This dimension measures the extent to which people

accept and expect unequal distribution of power in society. Japan has a
moderate score of 54 on this dimension, which means that it has a hierarchical
business structure with clear roles and responsibilities, but also respects the
opinions and contributions of subordinates. Managers in Japan are expected to
be benevolent and consultative, while employees are expected to be loyal and
obedient. However, managers also need to be aware of the potential conflicts
and frustrations that may arise from the rigid hierarchy and the lack of
empowerment among employees.

- Individualism: This dimension measures the degree to which people

value their personal rights and interests over those of the group. Japan has a low
score of 62 on this dimension, which means that it has a collectivistic culture
that emphasizes group harmony, loyalty, and consensus. Managers in Japan
need to foster a sense of belonging and mutual trust among their team members,
and avoid direct criticism or confrontation that may damage the face or
reputation of others. Employees in Japan are motivated by group goals and
rewards, and tend to avoid taking risks or expressing dissent.

- Motivation towards Achievement and Success: This dimension

measures the extent to which people value achievement, success, and
competition over caring, cooperation, and quality of life. Japan has a high score
of 95 on this dimension, which means that it has a masculine culture that values
performance, excellence, and challenge. Managers in Japan need to set clear and
ambitious objectives for their employees, and provide them with regular
feedback and recognition. Employees in Japan are driven by achievement and
advancement, and tend to work hard and long hours.

- Uncertainty avoidance: This dimension measures the degree to which

people feel comfortable or uncomfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty. Japan
has a very high score of 92 on this dimension, which means that it has a culture
that avoids uncertainty and prefers stability, order, and rules. Managers in Japan
need to provide their employees with detailed instructions, guidelines, and
procedures, and ensure that they follow them strictly. Employees in Japan are
cautious and meticulous, and tend to resist change or innovation.

- Long-term orientation: This dimension measures the extent to which

people value long-term goals and perspectives over short-term gratification and
immediate results. Japan has a very high score of 100 on this dimension, which
means that it has a culture that values long-term orientation and perseverance.
Managers in Japan need to align their strategies and actions with the long-term
vision and mission of their organization, and encourage their employees to do
the same. Employees in Japan are patient and adaptable, and tend to save and
invest for the future.
- Indulgence: This dimension measures the degree to which people value
fun, enjoyment, and freedom over restraint, discipline, and duty. Japan has a
low score of 42 on this dimension, which means that it has a culture that values
restraint and moderation over indulgence and spontaneity. Managers in Japan
need to balance their work ethic with their personal well-being, and promote a
healthy work-life balance for their employees. Employees in Japan are
disciplined and responsible, but may also suffer from stress or burnout.

Part 2: Case Study

On the case study, I will choose Google as my MNCs in order to provide
examples of how the MNC has performed managerial activities in a
multicultural environment.
1. History of Google
 Google is an American search engine company that was founded in 1998
by two Stanford University PhD students, Larry Page and Sergey Brin. They
initially developed a search engine called BackRub that used links to determine
the relevance of web pages. Later, they renamed it Google, a play on the word
googol, which is the mathematical term for the number 1 followed by 100 zeros.
Their mission was to organize the world's information and make it
universally accessible and useful. Google became a subsidiary of the holding
company Alphabet Inc. in 2015. Today, Google offers more than 50 internet
services and products, such as Gmail, YouTube, Android, and Google Maps. It
is one of the world's most prominent brands and one of the top four influential
companies in the high-tech industry, along with Apple, IBM, and Microsoft.
Google's history is quite fascinating. Here are some key points:

- 1995: The Google story begins at Stanford University when Larry Page
was considering Stanford for grad school and Sergey Brin, a student there, was
assigned to show him around.
- 1996: Larry Page and Sergey Brin, students at Stanford University in
California, developed a search algorithm at first known as "BackRub" with the
help of Scott Hassan and Alan Steremberg.
- 1997: The name Google.com was registered.
- 1998: Google was officially launched by Larry Page and Sergey Brin to
market Google Search, which has become the most used web-based search
engine. Google Inc. was officially born with an investment from Sun co-founder
Andy Bechtolsheim.
- 2002-2011: The company launched Google News in 2002, Gmail in
2004, Google Maps in 2005, Google Chrome in 2008, and the social network
known as Google+ in 2011 (which was shut down in April 2019).
- 2003: The expanding company moved several times, finally settling at
Mountain View.
- 2004: The company made its initial public offering.
- 2005: The company set up a charitable offshoot, Google.org.
- 2015: Google became the main subsidiary of the holding company
Alphabet Inc.
 Today, Google makes hundreds of products used by billions of people
across the globe, from YouTube and Android to Gmail and, of course, Google
Search. The relentless search for better answers continues to be at the core of
everything they do.
2. How Google has performed managerial activities in a
multicultural environment.
I will be using the Hofstede’s model in order to illustrate. Google’s
headquarters are in the US, its cultural features will be examined using this
model to comprehend cultural values and norms.

Viet Nam

United States
As you can see from the graph, US has a low power distance compares to
Viet Nam and Google’s culture reflects this. This indicate that Google has a flat
organizational structure and decentralized decision making process. Employees
at all levels can communicate and collaborate with each other.
Since Google has a low power distance culture, managers and leaders can
divide works without any concerns. This will increase employee responsibility
and work performance.
Google also fosters a culture of openness and transparency, where
information and feedback are shared freely across teams and levels. Google's
low power distance culture enables it to attract and retain talented and creative
people, who thrive in an environment that values collaboration, diversity, and
learning.
Google has a high individualism score compares to Viet Nam, meaning
that its employees are expected to be self-reliant, creative, and innovative, rather
than conforming to a collective norm or following a hierarchy. Google's high
individualism also reflects its corporate culture, which emphasizes freedom,
flexibility, and fun for its workers, as well as its products and services, which
cater to the diverse and personalized needs and preferences of its users.
The score of the US on Motivation for Achievement and Success is high
at 62, and this can be seen in the typical American behavior patterns. This can
be explained by the combination with Individualism. In other words,
Americans, so to speak, all show their Motivation for Achievement and Success
individually. The British, however, have the same culture in this respect.
The United States has a lower Uncertainty Avoidance score of 46,
indicating a society that has fewer rules and does not attempt to control all
outcomes and results. This is seen in Google's flexible and adaptable approach
to business.
Managing a diverse and multicultural workforce in Google has both
advantages and problems. On one hand, diversity can foster creativity,
innovation, and collaboration, as different perspectives and experiences can
enrich the problem-solving process and generate novel solutions. Google's
products and services can also benefit from having a diverse team that reflects
the needs and preferences of its global customers and users. Moreover,
diversity can enhance the company's reputation and social responsibility, as
well as attract and retain talented employees who value inclusion and respect.
On the other hand, diversity can also pose some challenges for managing
a workforce in Google. For instance, diversity can create communication
barriers, misunderstandings, and conflicts among employees who have different
cultural backgrounds, values, and norms. These issues can affect the team's
performance, cohesion, and morale, as well as increase the risk of
discrimination and harassment. Furthermore, diversity can require more
resources and efforts to implement effective policies and practices that promote
equity, fairness, and respect for all employees. Google's managers need to be
aware of these potential problems and take proactive measures to prevent or
resolve them.
Advices for googles to make the best of its diverse workforce
Diversity is one of its strengths, but it also poses some challenges. How
can Google make the best of its diverse workforce and foster a culture of
inclusion and collaboration
Here are some advices for Google to achieve this goal:
- Provide diversity training and education for all employees. This can
help them understand the benefits of diversity, the challenges of bias and
discrimination, and the skills and strategies to work effectively with people who
are different from them. According to a study by McKinsey, companies with
more diverse leadership teams are more likely to outperform their peers on
profitability and innovation.
- Create diverse teams and encourage cross-functional collaboration. This
can help employees learn from each other, leverage their diverse talents and
perspectives, and generate innovative solutions. A report by Deloitte found that
inclusive teams outperform their peers by 80% in team-based assessments.
- Promote a feedback culture and a growth mindset. This can help
employees give and receive constructive feedback, learn from their mistakes,
and improve their performance and skills. A survey by Harvard Business
Review revealed that 72% of employees think their performance would improve
if they received more feedback.
- Celebrate diversity and recognize achievements. This can help
employees feel valued, appreciated, and motivated. It can also help create a
positive work environment and a sense of belonging. A study by Gallup showed
that recognition is one of the most powerful drivers of employee engagement.
- Support employee resource groups and networks. This can help
employees connect with others who share their identity, interests, or goals. It
can also help them find mentors, sponsors, and allies who can support their
career development and well-being. A research by Catalyst found that
employees who participate in ERGs report higher levels of career satisfaction
and organizational commitment.

REFERENCES
https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/future-of-marketing/management-and-
culture/diversity-and-inclusion/-diversity-in-the-workplace/
https://www.hult.edu/blog/benefits-challenges-cultural-diversity-workplace/
https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison- tool?
countries=united+states%2Cvietnam
https://internationalbusinesscenter.org/geert-
hofstede/hofstede_united_states.shtml
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-
insights/delivering-through-diversity