Monday 28 May 2012
A dish washer to CORPORATE TRAINER & MOTIVATIONAL SPEAKER .
Sunday 20 May 2012
Friday 18 May 2012
Thursday 17 May 2012
Interesting
Increasingly, managers must deal with multiple ethnic
groups with very different cultures. Thanks to globalization, and social media
interaction that made thing far more easier. In today’s world you are likely to work with Japanese, French,
Chinese, German and all sorts of other nationalities. It is important to
recognize that people from different cultures have are different in a variety
of ways, including
1.
Different ways of looking at things
2.
Different ways of dressing
3.
Different ways of expressing
personality/goodness
In
an ideal world ...
The
policemen would be English
The
car mechanics would be German
The
cooks would be French
The
innkeepers would be Swiss,
And
the lovers would be Italian
In a
living hell ...
The
policemen would be German
The
car mechanics would be French
The
cooks would be English
The
innkeepers would be Italian
And
the lovers would be Swiss
These
differences can cause problems interpreting what the other person is doing.
Some simple examples:
In the US, a firm, short handshake indicates
self-confidence and (heterosexual) masculinity. A limp handshake by a man can
be interpreted (usually wrongly) as a sign of homosexuality or wimpiness. But
in most parts of Africa, a limp handshake is the correct way to do it.
Furthermore, it is common in Africa for the handshake to last several minutes,
while in the US a handshake that is even a few seconds too long is interpreted
as familiarity, warmth and possibly sexual attraction.
In Britain, men do not look at women on the streets. The
French do. Recently, a French public figure mentioned in a speech that the
Brits are all gay -- the evidence was their lack of overt interest in women.
Some
dimensions along which cultures vary:
High
Context vs Low Context
A low context culture is one in which things are fully
(though concisely) spelled out. Things are made explicit, and there is
considerable dependence on what is actually said or written. A high context
culture is one in which the communicators assume a great deal of commonality of
knowledge and views, so that less is spelled out explicitly and much more is
implicit or communicated in indirect ways. In a low context culture, more
responsibility is placed on the listener to keep up their knowledge base and
remain plugged into informal networks.
Low context cultures include Anglos, Germanics and
Scandinavians. High context cultures include Japanese, Arabs and French.
Implications
Interactions between high and low context peoples can be
problematic.
Japanese can find Westerners to be offensively blunt.
Westerners can find Japanese to be secretive, devious and bafflingly unforthcoming
with information
French can feel that Germans insult their intelligence by
explaining the obvious, while Germans can feel that French managers provide no
direction
Low context cultures are vulnerable to communication
breakdowns when they assume more shared understanding than there really is.
This is especially true in an age of diversity. Low context cultures are not
known for their ability to tolerate or understand diversity, and tend to be
more insular.
Monochronic
vs Polychronic
Monochronic cultures like to do just one thing at a time.
They value a certain orderliness and sense of there being an appropriate time
and place for everything. They do not value interruptions. Polychronic cultures
like to do multiple things at the same time. A manager's office in a
polychronic culture typically has an open door, a ringing phone and a meeting
all going on at the same time.
Polychronic cultures include the French and the Americans.
The Germans tend to be monochronic.
Implications
Interactions between types can be problematic. German
businessman cannot understand why the person he is meeting is so interruptible
by phone calls and people stopping by. Is it meant to insult him? When do they
get down to business?
Similarly, the American employee of a German company is
disturbed by all the closed doors -- it seems cold and unfriendly.
Future
vs Present vs Past Orientation
Past-oriented societies are concerned with traditional
values and ways of doing things. They tend to be conservative in management and
slow to change those things that are tied to the past. Past-oriented societies
include China, Britain, Japan and most spanish-speaking Latin American
countries.
Present-oriented societies include the rest of the
spanish-speaking Latin American countries. They see the past as passed and the
future as uncertain. They prefer short-term benefits.
Future-oriented societies have a great deal of optimism
about the future. They think they understand it and can shape it through their
actions. They view management as a matter of planning, doing and controlling
(as opposed to going with the flow, letting things happen). The United States
and, increasingly, Brazil, are examples of future-oriented societies.
Quantity
of Time
In some cultures, time is seen as being a limited resource
which is constantly being used up. It's like having a bathtub full of water
which can never be replaced, and which is running down the drain. You have to
use it as it runs down the drain or it's wasted. In other cultures, time is
more plentiful, if not infinite. In old agricultural societies, time was often
seen as circular, renewing itself each year.
Implications
In societies where time is limited, punctuality becomes a
virtue. It is insulting to waste someone's time, and the ability to do that and
get away with it is an indication of superiority/status. Time is money. In
cultures where time is plentiful, like India or Latin American, there is no
problem with making people wait all day, and then tell them to come back the
next day.
Time-plentiful cultures tend to rely on trust to do
business. Time-limited cultures don't have time to develop trust and so create
other mechanisms to replace trust (such as strong rule-by-law).
Power
Distance
The extent to which people accept differences in power and
allow this to shape many aspects of life. Is the boss always right because he
is the boss, or only when he gets it right?
Implications
In high power distance countries (most agrarian countries),
bypassing a superior is unsubordination. In low power distance countries (US,
northern europeans, Israel), bypassing is not usually a big deal.
In the US, superiors and subordinates often interact
socially as equals. An outsider watching a party of professors and graduate
students typically cannot tell them apart.
Individualism
vs Collectivism
In individualist cultures, individual uniqueness, self-determination
is valued. A person is all the more admirable if they are a "self-made
man" or "makes up their own mind" or show initiative or work
well independently. Collectivist cultures expect people to identify with and
work well in groups which protect them in exchange for loyalty and compliance.
Paradoxically, individualist cultures tend to believe that
there are universal values that should be shared by all, while collectivist
cultures tend to accept that different groups have different values.
Many of the asian cultures are collectivist, while anglo
cultures tend to be individualist.
Implications
A market research firm conducted a survey of tourist
agencies around the world. The questionnaires came back from most countries in
less than a month. But the agencies in the asian countries took months to do
it. After many telexes, it was finally done. The reason was that, for example,
American tourist agencies assigned the work to one person, while the Filipinos
delegated the work to the entire department, which took longer. The researchers
also noticed that the telexes from the Philippines always came from a different
person.
Benefits
of Workplace Diversity
An
organization's success and competitiveness depends upon its ability to embrace
diversity and realize the benefits. When organizations actively assess their
handling of workplace diversity issues, develop and implement diversity plans,
multiple benefits are reported such as:
Increased
adaptability
Organizations
employing a diverse workforce can supply a greater variety of solutions to
problems in service, sourcing, and allocation of resources. Employees from
diverse backgrounds bring individual talents and experiences in suggesting
ideas that are flexible in adapting to fluctuating markets and customer
demands.
Broader
service range
A
diverse collection of skills and experiences (e.g. languages, cultural
understanding) allows a company to provide service to customers on a global
basis.
Variety
of viewpoints
A
diverse workforce that feels comfortable communicating varying points of view
provides a larger pool of ideas and experiences. The organization can draw from
that pool to meet business strategy needs and the needs of customers more
effectively.
More
effective execution
Companies
that encourage diversity in the workplace inspire all of their employees to
perform to their highest ability. Company-wide strategies can then be executed;
resulting in higher productivity, profit, and return on investment.
Challenges
of Diversity in the Workplace
Taking
full advantage of the benefits of diversity in the workplace is not without its
challenges. Some of those challenges are:
Communication
- Perceptual, cultural and language barriers need to be overcome for diversity
programs to succeed. Ineffective communication of key objectives results in
confusion, lack of teamwork, and low morale.
Resistance
to change - There are always employees who will refuse to accept the fact that
the social and cultural makeup of their workplace is changing. The "we've
always done it this way" mentality silences new ideas and inhibits
progress.
Implementation
of diversity in the workplace policies - This can be the overriding challenge
to all diversity advocates. Armed with the results of employee assessments and
research data, they must build and implement a customized strategy to maximize
the effects of diversity in the workplace for their particular organization.
Problems
Caused by Cultural Differences
You greet your Austrian client. This is the sixth time you
have met over the last 4 months. He calls you Herr Smith. You think of him as a
standoffish sort of guy who doesn't want to get really friendly. That might be
true in America, where calling someone Mr. Smith after the 6th meeting would
probably mean something -- it is marked usage of language -- like "we're
not hitting it off". But in Austria, it is normal.
A Canadian conducting business in Kuwait is surprised when
his meeting with a high-ranking official is not held in a closed office and is
constantly interrupted. He starts wondering if the official is as important as
he had been led to believe, and he starts to doubt how seriously his business
is being taken
A British boss asked a new, young American employee if he
would like to have an early lunch at 11 am each day. The employee said 'Yeah,
that would be great!' The boss immediately said "With that kind of
attitude, you may as well forget about lunch!" The employee and the boss
were both baffled by what went wrong. [In England, saying "yeah" in
that context is seen as rude and disrespectful.
A Japanese businessman wants to tell his Norwegian client
that he is uninterested in a particular sale. So he says "That will be
very difficult." The Norwegian eagerly asks how he can help. The Japanese
is mystified. To him, saying that something is difficult is a polite way of
saying "No way in hell!". Dave Barry tells the story of being on a
trip to Japan and working with a Japanese airline clerk on taking a flight from
one city to another. On being asked about it, the clerk said "Perhaps you
would prefer to take the train." So he said "NO, I want to fly."
So she said "There are many other ways to go." He said "yes, but
I think it would be best to fly." She said "It would very
difficult". Eventually, it came out that there were no flights between
those cities.
Three
basic kinds of problems:
Interpreting
others comments and actions,
Predicting
behavior,
And
Conflicting
behavior.
Some
Perceptions of Americans
Europe
& especially England. "Americans are stupid and unsubtle.
And they are fat and bad dressers."
Finland "Americans always want to say your name: 'That's a nice tie, Mikko. Hi
Mikko, how are you Mikko'
Indian "Americans are always in a hurry. Just watch the way they walk down the
street."
Kenyan "Americans are distant. They are not really close to other people -- even
other Americans."
Turkey "Once
we were out in a rural area in the middle of nowhere and saw an American come
to a stop sign. Though he could see in both directions for miles, and there was
no traffic, he still stopped!"
Colombia "In
the United States, they think that life is only work."
Indonesia "In the United States everything has to be talked about and analyzed. Even
the littlest thing has to be 'Why, why why?'."
Ethiopia "The American is very explicit. He wants a 'yes' or 'no'. If someone tries
to speak figuratively, the American is confused."
Iran "The first time my
American professor told me 'I don't know, I will have to look it up', I was
shocked. I asked myself 'Why is he teaching me?'"
Tuesday 8 May 2012
Miles to go before I sleep
Whose
woods these are I think I know.
His
house is in the village, though;
He
will not see me stopping here
To
watch his woods fill up with snow.
My
little horse must think it queer
To
stop without a farmhouse near
Between
the woods and frozen lake
The
darkest evening of the year.
He
gives his harness bells a shake
To
ask if there's some mistake.
The
only other sound's the sweep
Of
easy wind and downy flake.
The
woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But
I have promises to keep,
And
miles to go before I sleep,
And
miles to go before I sleep.
Robert
Frost, “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening” from The Poetry of Robert Frost,
edited by Edward Connery Lathem. Copyright 1923, © 1969 by Henry Holt and
Company, Inc., renewed 1951, by Robert Frost. Reprinted with the permission of
Henry Holt and Company, LLC.
Wednesday 2 May 2012
Leadership Styles
Modern
leadership demands finding the right balance between both. You need to
recognize your own strengths and exploit them, but you also need to have an
ability to adapt your style to different situations in order to achieve the
maximum effectiveness. If you lead in a manner that is solely in line with your
own preferred leadership style, then you will fail to be effective. If you only
try to adapt to the situation, you will suffer from executive burnout.
Leadership
style is the manner and approach of providing direction, implementing plans,
and motivating people. Kurt Lewin (1939) led a group of researchers to identify
different styles of leadership. This early study has been very influential and
established three major leadership styles. The three major styles of leadership
are
Ø Authoritarian
or autocratic
Ø Participative
or democratic
Ø Delegate
or Free Reign
Although
good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, bad leaders
tend to stick with one style.
Authoritarian (autocratic)
I
want both of you to. . .
This
style is used when leaders tell their employees what they want done and how
they want it accomplished, without getting the advice of their followers. Some
of the appropriate conditions to use it is when you have all the information to
solve the problem, you are short on time, and your employees are well
motivated.
Some
people tend to think of this style as a vehicle for yelling, using demeaning
language, and leading by threats and abusing their power. This is not the
authoritarian style, rather it is an abusive, unprofessional style called
“bossing people around.” It has no place in a leader's repertoire.
The
authoritarian style should normally only be used on rare occasions. If you have
the time and want to gain more commitment and motivation from your employees,
then you should use the participative style.
Participative (democratic)
Let's
work together to solve this. . .
This
style involves the leader including one or more employees in the decision
making process (determining what to do and how to do it). However, the leader
maintains the final decision making authority. Using this style is not a sign
of weakness, rather it is a sign of strength that your employees will respect.
This
is normally used when you have part of the information, and your employees have
other parts. Note that a leader is not expected to know everything — this is
why you employ knowledgeable and skillful employees. Using this style is of
mutual benefit — it allows them to become part of the team and allows you to
make better decisions.
Delegative (free reign)
You
two take care of the problem while I go. . .
In
this style, the leader allows the employees to make the decisions. However, the
leader is still responsible for the decisions that are made. This is used when
employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what needs to be done
and how to do it. You cannot do everything! You must set priorities and
delegate certain tasks.
This
is not a style to use so that you can blame others when things go wrong, rather
this is a style to be used when you fully trust and confidence in the people
below you. Do not be afraid to use it, however, use it wisely!
Forces
A
good leader uses all three styles, depending on what forces are involved
between the followers, the leader, and the situation. Some examples include:
Using
an authoritarian style on a new employee who is just learning the job. The
leader is competent and a good coach. The employee is motivated to learn a new
skill. The situation is a new environment for the employee.
Using
a participative style with a team of workers who know their job. The leader
knows the problem, but does not have all the information. The employees know
their jobs and want to become part of the team.
Using
a delegative style with a worker who knows more about the job than you. You
cannot do everything and the employee needs to take ownership of her job! In
addition, this allows you to be at other places, doing other things.
Using
all three: Telling your employees that a procedure is not working correctly and
a new one must be established (authoritarian). Asking for their ideas and input
on creating a new procedure (participative). Delegating tasks in order to
implement the new procedure (delegative).
Forces
that influence the style to be used included:
How
much time is available.
Are
relationships based on respect and trust or on disrespect?
Who
has the information — you, your employees, or both?
How
well your employees are trained and how well you know the task.
Internal
conflicts.
Stress
levels.
Type
of task. Is it structured, unstructured, complicated, or simple?
Laws
or established procedures such as OSHA or training plans.
Positive and Negative Approaches
There
is a difference in ways leaders approach their employee. Positive leaders use
rewards, such as education, independence, etc. to motivate employees. While
negative employers emphasize penalties. While the negative approach has a place
in a leader's repertoire of tools, it must be used carefully due to its high
cost on the human spirit.
Negative
leaders act domineering and superior with people. They believe the only way to
get things done is through penalties, such as loss of job, days off without
pay, reprimanding employees in front of others, etc. They believe their
authority is increased by frightening everyone into higher levels of
productivity. Yet what always happens when this approach is used wrongly is
that morale falls; which of course leads to lower productivity.
Also
note that most leaders do not strictly use one or another, but are somewhere on
a continuum ranging from extremely positive to extremely negative. People who
continuously work out of the negative are bosses while those who primarily work
out of the positive are considered real leaders.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)