Introduction

This report will discuss about cultural differences between two nations, which are China and Brazil. The insights discussed will be useful for any company which has yet to have any presence in both China and Brazil but is planning to expand to one of these two countries.

Cultures in China versus Brazil

Cultural differences between nations can be examined via national cultural model as proposed by Hofstede, whereby the five key national cultural dimensions that can be used to characterize cultural differences include: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, long or short term orientation, masculinity versus femininity and individualism or collectivism (Harvey, 1997; Kirkman, Lowe & Gibson, 2006).

Fortunately, there are research into the cultures of China and Brazil, from within literature, using Hofstede cultural dimension model. From the research, the cultures of people in China can be characterized as follow: long term orientation, collectivism, higher power distance, relatively femininity, as well as moderate in uncertainty avoidance (Tang & Koveos, 2008; Li & Chia, 2011). Contrary to that, Brazil seemed to score moderate on all of these Hofstede cultural dimensions: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, long or short term orientation, masculinity versus femininity and individualism or collectivism (Tang & Koveos, 2008). For graphical comparison of the score of the respective cultural dimensions (between Brazil and China, as well as in relation to other countries around the globe), Figure 1 towards Figure 5 are presented below.

Figure 1

Source: Tang & Koveos (2008)

Figure 2

Source: Tang & Koveos (2008)

Figure 3

Source: Tang & Koveos (2008)

Figure 4

Source: Tang & Koveos (2008)

Figure 5

Source: Tang & Koveos (2008)

To explain, China is a collective country. For that, the people in China tend to emphasize on harmonious relationships between people, and to save face for the others is important (Li & Chia, 2011). In a way, this nature means that people in the country place great importance on relationships among people, i.e., guanxi (Siew & Jones, 2009). In other words, to engage in direct confrontation or in direct conflicts with others is not something preferred or ‘acceptable’ by the people. The cultures in Brazil, to certain degree, are being affected by the cultures of United States of America (Thornton, 2011). In a way, the Brazilians are more individualistic – as compared to the Chinese (Tu, Lin & Chang, 2011). That does not means that inter-personal relationships between people in Brazil is not important, as there are actually findings that Brazilian businessmen are very people oriented and place a high value on human relations (Turner & Kleiner, 2001). However, it can be expected that Brazilian may place greater emphasis on personal achievement, and more comfortable to confront each other – as compared to the Chinese.

Then, the high power distance in china means that issues such as leadership position or seniority is important aspect that people consider during inter-personal interaction (Lunnan & Traavik, 2009). This can actually be easily observed as the Chinese tend to emphasize on respecting the elders, and to submit to command of leaders (without much confrontation). Given that the degree of power distance of Brazil is moderate, it can be interpreted that Brazilian may have less tendency to value issue such as ‘seniority’ – as compared to the Chinese. Such differences will have implication for businesses, such as Psyche, when trying to do business in the two different countries (Brazil versus China).

Implications

Cultural differences demand business people to adapt the business practices to suit the different local cultures, to be more effective and relevant to the society a business is operating within (Hofstede, 1998; 1994; 1993). The section above had discussed about cultural differences of China and Brazil, and this section will outline the important implications.

First, it would be better to pay attentions to small details when dealing with employees in China, such as not to confront them directly, as that may cause them to loss face. Then, it would be better to confront the employees personally (i.e., not in public), if ever needed, so that to avoid breaking the harmonious environment in workplace. To confront to educate employees individually is also crucial to save face for them, which will be an effective long term strategy. In Brazil however, it may still crucial to pay attention to feelings or emotion of people, but manager can expect that people may be less sensitive to direct confrontation. Then, it may also not relevant to have very huge salary differential in China (such as the manager’s salary is 20 times the workers’ salary) – given the collective society tend to discourage serious different treatments among people. Contrary to that, high salary differential may be more acceptable in Brazil.

Then, in China, an expatriate manager from UK can expect that he will be respected by local Chinese workers, and that the workers may not be comfortable to provide feedback or critique the policy set forth by the managers (as the high power distance culture can cultivate a tendency among Chinese workers to obey the command from the superior, and not to argue against the superior – even when the workers think that the superior is wrong). In a way, managers may need alternative way to get feedback from workers. However, manager can expect more direct or frank communication messages from the employees in Brazil.

Yet, managers may also need to be prepared to have difficulties manage elderly workforce in China (especially when manager sent to manage them is young), as when the Chinese value over seniority, the elder employees may have expectations that the young manager should do so as well. In Brazil however, such issue will less likely to occur. In a way, it would be easier to implement policy such as to reward purely for performance (regarding of the age or tenure of an employee) in Brazil, as compared to China.

Conclusion

To conclude, there are serious implications for businesses, when conducting business in different countries (of different cultures). Without understanding that, a business may soon find out itself that it is operating irrelevantly in a foreign country, which will cause undesirable business outcomes.

References & Bibliography

Harvey, F. (1997). National cultural differences in theory and practice evaluating Hofstede’s national cultural framework. Information Technology & People, 10(2), 132-146.

Hill, C. W. L. (2012). International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace. 9th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 7(1), 81-81.

Hofstede, G. (1994). Management scientists are human. Management Science, 40(1), 4-4.

Hofstede, G. (1998). Think locally, act globally: Cultural constraints in personnel management. Management International Review, 38(09388249), 7-26.

Kirkman, B. L., Lowe, K. B., & Gibson, C. B. (2006). A quarter century of culture’s consequences: A review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede’s cultural values framework. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(3), 285-320.

Li, Y., & Chia, R. (2011). The effect of traditional Chinese fuzzy thinking on human resource practices in mainland China. Chinese Management Studies, 5(4), 431-449.

Lunnan, R., & Traavik, L. E. (2009). Is the standardization of human resource practices perceived as fair across national cultures? Baltic Journal of Management, 4(2), 127-148.

Siew, F. L., & Jones, S. (2009). A guanxi model of human resource management. Chinese Management Studies, 3(4), 313-327.

Tang, L., & Koveos, P. E. (2008). A framework to update Hofstede’s cultural value indices: Economic dynamics and institutional stability. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(6), 1045-1063.

Thornton, J. (2011). From Africa to Brazil: Culture, identity, and an Atlantic slave trade, 1600-1830. The International Journal of African Historical Studies, 44(2), 346-347.

Tu, Y., Lin, S., & Chang, Y. (2011). A cross-cultural comparison by Individualism/Collectivism among Brazil, Russia, India and China. International Business Research, 4(2), 175-182.

Turner, W., & Kleiner, B. H. (2001). What managers must know to conduct business in Brazil. Management Research News, 24(3), 72-75.

Save

Save