Organisations & Culture

QUESTION

When removed from their families, the children were prepared for “a better life”, how is that true or false when considering different perspectives?

Considering it from the perspective of the Aborigines it was completely false, because they were being removed from their families, preventing those kids from receiving love and growing in a real family. Kids became orphans that were imposed with rules, education and religion they didn’t knew. From their perspective (aborigines) they were not doing anything wrong so there was no reason at all for “kidnapping” their children. As one of the girls in the movie said, they were “sick” people that were doing nothing more than stealing their freedom and their essence.

From the perspective of the white people, they were right, they were providing a better future for the Aboriginal and half-caste children. They were giving the kids a place to sleep, food, clothes and they were being taught about all the good things a person needs to know to have a good future such as speaking English, praying to God and eating properly. The white people were truly convinced about the importance of mixing native children with white people in order to eliminate all that background that made aborigines an “inferior” ethnicity.

The firsts steps towards the creation of the European Union began in 1951 with the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community, signed by six countries: France and West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. In 1953, “The Six” signed the Treaty of Rome which consisted in two treaties that established the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community. Through the years the European Community got enlarged with more countries belonging to the Community.
In 1986 the European Union flag started to be used and in 1993 the Treaty of Maastrich was signed, this Treaty was the origin of the European Union as we know it today.

Today the European Union has 27 State members; the Union is the first economy in the world with a GDP of € 12276.2 bill; it has a population of 495 million people and has 23 official languages, with German being the most common native language.
Nowadays Croatia, Yugoslavia, the Republic of Macedonia and Turkey are candidates to enter the European Union.

Turks migration to Germany

Germany is the fourth economy in the world and the first one within the European Union, it has a population of about 80 million people and it is the world’s third destination for migrants. It is a Christian country with 64% of its population belonging to this particular religion.

The relationship between Germany and turkey goes back to the 18th and 19th century. During the First World War both supported each other, but the problems started in the postwar period mainly because huge migrations for Turkey to Germany. Turks lack of qualified hand labor but they got official work permission in 1971. By 1973 of all the Turkish that were living in Western Europe, around 80% were established in Germany.

If we oppose the German perspective towards Turks to a real analysis it is possible to see that Germans have negative feelings towards immigrants; but the real situation is that those migrants don’t have much aggregate on native wages and employment. From the German perspective immigrants create a burden for the public budget; a good analysis could show that Turkish population has the characteristic of being very entrepreneurial people bringing new business ideas. German population sees Turks as a threat to their employments, but it is possible to see a great Turkish participation in the house, car and stock market; it is said that Turks spend even more than native Germans.

Most Turks don’t have a diploma because of the language, but they say it is not the only barrier for Turkish population. Turks are very linked to traditions, they won’t deeply embrace German culture what creates a clash of cultures. Turks immigrants brought to Germany their own religious rituals causing the cityscapes to change mainly because of Mosques and Islam cemeteries.

It is possible to say that the actual situation in Germany with the Turks is the result of the evolution of 400 years of close relations between both cultures.

QUESTION

There is a current discussion around the existence of the co-determinism principle in Germany. Select, define and explain 3 arguments in favor and 3 against such principle.

Co-determinism is a German principle that states that employees should participate in the company’s decisions. Co-determinism means that firms are run jointly by the owners and the unions, giving them equal rights as the owners in the management. It was created as an initiative from the unions of coal and steel industries, the two most powerful unions in the country; they wanted to create a way “to prevent any future industrial baron from using the great mines and steel mills as the basis for a new German war party” (Co-Determinism System German Labor Weapon. The Milwaukee Sentinel. 4th August, 1953)

Arguments in favor:
· It promotes social integration and is highly motivating: As workers know they will be part of the decision making process and what they decide will also affect their future, they will feel motivated to do their best. By bringing into the table owners and union workers together they are promoting integration, the exchange of ideas and different ways to create opportunities and solve problems.
· Corporate policy making will deteriorate: It means that those rules imposed by managers without much knowledge of the workers situation is becoming to an end under Co-Determinism because if workers have the right to vote and the right to make decisions, they will have the needed knowledge of their situation and provide the proper knowledge to create proper solutions that leads to a policy making that goes along with real situation.
· Elimination of the system will do nothing to improve the quality of the supervisory boards: Removing union workers from the Boards does not necessarily means that quality will improve, in some cases it could mean a drawback because union workers bring ideas from a totally different perspective that needs to be taken into account because they are the ones that really know how the company works.

Argument against:
· More flexibility is needed in the globalized world: Union workers will try their best to protect their interest and will put some barriers for decisions that a company needs to take in order to grow in the long term.
· Bureaucratic model that no longer has place in the system: That model was created under a completely different situation; now that times have changed models need to evolve in order to be successful in today’s world.
· German industry is stable enough to do without co-determination: As said before that model was created under a specific situation that no longer exists and now that the world has become a different place the same solutions of long time ago does not apply. German industry does not need to be prevented from war but it does need a more flexible environment and co-determination is putting a barrier to it.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Images from http://www.gettyimages.com/

Co-Determinism System German Labor Weapon. The Milwaukee Sentinel. 4th August, 1953

1. "While permitting the individual the right to seek economic well-being, Islam makes a clear distinction between what is halal (lawful) and what is haram (forbidden or unlawful) in pursuit of such economic activity. In broad terms, Islam forbids all forms of economic activity, which are morally or socially injurious."
2. "While acknowledging the individual's right to ownership of wealth legitimately acquired, Islam makes it obligatory on the individual to spend his wealth judiciously and not to hoard it, keep it idle or to squander it."
3. "While allowing an individual to retain any surplus wealth, Islam seeks to reduce the margin of the surplus for the well-being of the community as a whole, in particular the destitute and deprived sections of society by participation in the process of Zakat (a tax on wealth that is distributed to the needy)."
4. "While making allowance for the ways of human nature and yet not yielding to the consequences of its worst propensities, Islam seeks to prevent the accumulation of wealth in a few hands to the detriment of society as a whole, by its laws of inheritance."
5. "Viewed as a whole, the economic system envisaged by Islam aims at social justice without inhibiting individual enterprise beyond the point where it becomes not only collectively injurious but also individually self-destructive."

(taken from http://www.islamic-banking.com/)

Based on your research and knowledge about this topic, what is the future of Islamic Banking in terms of global expansion and growth?

I think that Islamic Banking will continue growing and expanding in the world for several reasons. First I think that globalization has brought to the countries lots of people coming from different cultures, and Islamic culture is not the exception. With Muslims travelling and establishing in different countries it is very possible that Islamic banks will create subsidiaries to attend the market.
Second I think that Islamic banking provides an alternative for people and since those banks are not exclusive for Muslims they could become an interesting alternative for those who perceive regular banks as more than “fierce” capitalism that take advantage of the people charging them with huge interests.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

http://www.islamic-banking.com/. April 30, 2010

Islam’s approach to ethical investment. [http://islamicfinancenews.wordpress.com/]. May 3, 2010

Basic concepts and Principles of Islamic Banking.[http://www.bankinginfo.com.my/] May 3rd, 2010

Images from: www.bendib.com

East Asia is a region that covers eight countries: China, Japan, South Korea, North Korea, Macau, Mongolia, Hong Kong and Taiwan. The study will focus on the managerial systems of South Korea and Japanese firms since they are very representative countries from this region.

In order to understand phenomenons are affecting the organizations in those countries two concepts should be understood: convergence and divergence. Convergence states that as countries develops the management systems will converge to one model, usually based on those from developed countries. The comparative cultural approach or divergence states that there are some cultural norms that force managerial systems to match the internal environment then the culture limits the alternative strategies for the organizations of a given country.

What has occurred in Asia is that Japan, an Asian country, was able to develop its own managerial system so Asian firms can decide whether to converge to western or to non western development models for organizations.

The Japanese managerial system is very interested in market share, they tend to use aggressive pricing and search economies of scale. They use long term commitments with suppliers in order to take advantage of the close cooperation and coordination of the production process. They emphasize on building group consensus and group loyalty encouraging the participation of workers and the middle management employees. Japanese companies scan customers and competitors because they want to find the right kind of customer. Other important characteristic is that they connect product design and production.

The main entrepreneurial groups in Japan are called “Zaibatsu”; they are conglomerate of companies from diverse industries belonging to a group of people. Zaibatsus may own banks; this characteristic has created a huge gap between medium size companies that doesn’t belong to a Zaibatsu and those that does because these banks can give loans to their own companies even if they can’t afford the loans.

Korea has received a lot of influence from Japan; it was a Japanese colony for about 40 years. Managerial systems from these two countries are similar but also have differences. Koreans are more individualistic than the Japanese and this gives Korean a higher sense of freedom. Korean workers tend to change work more freely and they do not emphasize so much on group consensus and group loyalty. Managers in Korea tend to be more authoritarian and they are the ones taking the important decisions.

The main entrepreneurial groups in Korea are called “Chaebols”. They are also conglomerates of companies from diverse industries but they belong to a family and are managed by family members. The main difference between Chaebols and Zaibatsu is that the first ones can’t own banks. But there is a gap between firms belonging to Chaebols and those that don’t because the government used to give them many benefits due to their rates of exports.

Lee, Jangho, Thomas W. Roehl, & Soonkyoo Choe created a model in which they state that “ a national management system is influenced by the national culture and level of development” this means that as firms grow larger and become more internationalized they will tend to converge to a developed managerial system; in this case large and internationalized Korean firms will tend to converge to Japanese firms. They found that sometimes Korean organizations are more Japanese than the Japanese themselves because Korean companies tend to emphasize even more in market share and profit maximization. Internationalized Korean firms converge to Japanese firms even more than large Korean firms.

QUESTION

In the case of Korean and Japanese management styles, do you think they tend to converge or diverge? Are they likely to converge to each other or to other management styles

In the case of Korean and Japanese management styles they tend to converge as Korean firms grow larger and become more internationalized. The Korean management style is likely to converge to the Japanese one, and Japanese companies have their own way for doing things in international markets, that means that Japanese organizations are not converging to a western management style but creating their own. It is said that as Korean firms grow larger and become more internationalized they often are “more Japanese than the Japanese themselves” what means that Korean companies study so hard and have so strong incentives to incorporate Japanese management styles that while the Japanese move on and create new ways Korean are still doing what the Japanese did some time ago.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lee, Jangho, Thomas W. Roehl, & Soonkyoo Choe. 2000. What Makes Management Style Similar and Distinct Across Borders? Growth, Experience and Culture in Korean and Japanese Firms. Journal of International Business Studies

Images from http://www.istock.com/

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development defines: “Managing diversity is about ensuring that all employees have the opportunity to maximize their potential and enhance their self-development and their contribution to the organization.”

National Culture

Do you think there is a corporate culture in every organization?

I believe there is a corporate culture in every organization; every company has its own way for doing things which characterizes it and differentiates it from other companies. But I also think that the corporate culture such as we knew it is changing and adapting itself to fit in a globalized world because now we can’t pretend to find a company with rigid values and an unbreakable way for doing things, as globalization reaches more countries and people and as behaviors change it is necessary that companies go in the same direction. With higher turnover rates and more national cultures interacting it becomes more difficult to establish values and norms, but it does not mean that an organization lacks those elements because I think that when a company is created it “born” with its own unique characteristics, it own and special culture, which can vary with time but remains the same in essence.
Assuming there is a corporate culture in every organization I think it can’t be modified because when it reaches the status of culture it means that every single person in the organization has interiorized the values and ways; trying to change those means switching things that are deep inside. If a company changes its corporate culture it is very possible to create a situation in which the employees get confused and go in different directions from the ones the company wanted. A strong organizational culture may lead to the failure of processes that require deep organizational change, if a company wants to merge with another and both of them have strong cultures there is a high chance of failure, but if a company has a stronger culture the most possible outcome is that it will eliminate the other’s company way of doing things.