Training on Local Employees in Asian Hospitality Industry

9

2250

One primary understanding that needs to be explored in this proposed research study is the difference between European leadership and Asian employees at the cultural level. European human resources managers generally hail from cultures that are globalized and have a long-standing industrialized and commercial history. Much of this influence has come from Western countries, such as the United States, that acted as the framework for much of the modern human resources principles being used in a variety of industries today. European leaders are from individualistic societies, under Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Framework, whereby managers and employees value self-expression and independence in the workplace and tend to value personal goal attainment over that of group goal-setting and group-oriented rewards (Blodgett, Bakir &amp. Rose, 2008). In this type of organization or culture, individualists seek more decision-making authority and job role autonomy in order to remain loyal and satisfied so that they can become performance-oriented and seek to meet strategic goals. This individualistic attitude drives the majority of their human resources policies as it relates to employee training and learning. In Asian cultures, however, there is a strong, historical trend toward collectivism. This type of cultural values group norms and group affiliation over individualized expression where “they view themselves as a member of an extended family, place group interests ahead of individual needs, and value reciprocation of favors and respect for tradition” (Blodgett et al, p.339). Employees that have strong collectivist values often seek opinion and networking from peers and operate well in very structured, centralized management hierarchies. Collectivists often value rules and regulations and seek ongoing leadership presence in their job roles and do not function most effectively when left to autonomous job functions.

You Might Also Like