Introduction
The most common reason that people want from work are reward job satisfaction. This is the general feeling and perception that we have in working, although there could be some other minor reasons. Different cultures view this as the general reason because of the history of work that comes from the history of man himself.
We know that from the beginning, man was destined to work. From the Bible, we know that when man was sent out of the Garden of Eden because of original sin, they were commanded by God to till the land and that they had to work in order to live. From that time on, man has viewed work differently. To him, work is like a punishment. It is only when he gets enough remuneration, such as more money and more bonuses, that he gets satisfaction from his work.
Firth (2002) argues: “Actually the commonly accepted wisdom is that people really want the rewards most of all, and they’ll take whatever satisfaction they can get as a nice bonus (but maybe a cash bonus is better)” (p. 11).
This is the reason why people are forced to work – for they really are motivated by the lure of money and bonuses. But if company withdraws some amount, or say it was going down, workers start to strike, or go to some other company, as much as possible.
Firth (2002) adds that the ‘evolution of our own work is in how we think about it” (p. 17). Although there is a historical and biblical concept that all of us have to be aware of, we must also know that work is valuable in our daily lives. It is not only for the reason that we have to work because we have to survive, or we need the money to buy food and clothing, the simple truth is that is a part of our existence.
All peoples of the world have different concepts of work. Yet, we have that simple and general principle of work.
The Broader Concept of Work
When we talk of work, we mention such topics as business organizations and, subsequently, globalization. Businesses have become globalized, and the world of work has changed. The trend is we are in a global village with work and business being conducted so fast-paced. This is entirely a different ball game, in a manner of speaking, because of high technology, computers, and the internet. Generally, there is no business right now that does not have technology employed for its many functions. Some years ago, business was conducted ‘manually’, meaning in taking down notes, accounts, or bills of customers, it was enough to give some receipts. There were no computers then.
The term globalization has emerged as an offshoot of the high-technology tools that have sprung these past decades. We have become globalized means we can now connect and conduct business with the rest of the world so easily. With just a computer with an internet connection, you can connect with anyone or wherever you want to in any place in the world that has an internet connection as well.
We can sell and buy online. High technology has affected much of our work and our concept of work. Because of computers, work has been shortened and so fast-paced that what can be done in a day’s work years ago before the advent of computers, could now be done in a few minutes.
Organizations and states have become cross-cultural because of the increasing internationalization of work. Because of globalization, there is a decline in barriers to international trade and the rise of globally integrated enterprises. Supplies and most functions in a business are outsourced.
However, because of globalization, work cultures of different nations become more pronounced; meaning, in organizations where there is the presence of employees of different cultures, management and the employees themselves have to deal with complexity in their job and the way management handles them because of cross-cultural differences.
Searching enough literature on the concept of work culture around the world, we always come across literature on organizational behavior. This topic deals with cross-cultural aspects because, as mentioned, businesses and organizations have become internationalized, or that they are working globally.
Comparison of Work Cultures
Working on theories on organizational behavior, Drenth et al. (1979, cited in Firth 1998, p. 69) made a comparison of the Netherlands, the UK, and Yugoslavia (as it was then) and “showed that Yugoslav workers, with their tradition of worker participation, had more influence on strategic decisions than their British or Dutch counterparts but that in all three countries top management had a disproportionate amount of both influence and rule-based power.”
Although Drenth and his colleagues were working on theories of organizational development, a study on work culture became one of the sidelights of the study.
On the other hand, some Russian and American scholars found that “Soviet managers tended to rely more heavily on a hierarchically oriented, functionally specific system of management” (Cray & Mallory, 1998, p. 70). This study gives us the idea that Soviet work culture is more traditional even with the globalization of organizations. In the present setup or organizations, globalization has allowed management to work horizontally, rather than vertically. The top-down authoritarian management in the present trend does not any more work.
Work cultures were also compared in China, Hong Kong, and Canada by Tse et al. (cited in Cray & Mallory, 1998, p. 70), which found differences both in the choices that managers made and in the processes by which they made them. This study discovered that culture played a great role in management, but a comparison of the three cultures showed that the “more ambiguity in decision making, the more likely it is that culture will play a role in the process of decision-making and the outcomes” (Cray & Mallory, p. 70).
Another study conducted on the role of the board of directors in formulating strategy examined the perceptions of Australian, Japanese, and overseas Chinese. It was found out that both the “Chinese and Japanese board of directors saw boards as support functions for the top-level managers, although in Japanese firms the function was more formal than operational” (Cray & Mallory 1998, p. 71).
Functions of the Board vary worldwide. China, for example, has a different set up in its national companies because they include “politicians among the Board members, but private Chinese companies would more likely be headed by founders. In Malaysia, a native Malay always heads the Board. In the wake of financial debacles in US and European firms such as Enron, Ahold, Parmalat, and Worldcom, many nations introduced new legislation mandating what and how boards were to monitor senior managers… Singapore requires that auditors be changed no less frequently than every two years. These kinds of governance changes are occurring worldwide.” (Parker, 2005, p. 352)
Another comparison on work culture is that of Australians, Japanese, and overseas Chinese. Both the Chinese and Japanese saw strategy in more abstract terms than Australian directors, who tended to view themselves as decision-makers more inclined to intervene directly in the strategic functions of the firm. The Australian directors were more intervening in the affairs of the company, than the overseas Chinese and the Japanese, who were more passive in their jobs as directors. (Cray & Mallory, 1998, p. 71)
The process of decision-making, including strategic-decision making, is influenced by cultural factors. The evidence that has been generated by investigations of international joint ventures indicates that decision processes find conflicting cultural orientations. This is a barrier to joint decision-making.
Coclusion
Different cultures have different perceptions of work, but generally, the principle, including the objectives and mission of work are the same across cultures. We may have different ways and methods in the workplace but all of our work is for the satisfaction of being paid in doing our job.
There are general reasons for which all of us value work, provided to us by Firth (2002), and these are:
- a source of pride and dignity
- a measure of personal achievement, and
- an expression of one’s identity and relationship to the world.
These values and relations to work seem to be general. No matter where you live or work, and no matter what time in this life you live, the above reasons for work apply. In the remote places of the world, there is difficult work, but they have been made ‘easy’ because of high technology. We just have to pray that high technology hasn’t made work complicated, but it seems it does. Nevertheless, we are now living in a different world of work.
References
Cray, D. & Mallory, G. (1998). Making Sense of Managing Culture. London: International Thomson Business Press.
Firth, D. (2002). Life and Work Express. United Kingdom: Capstone Publishing.
Parker, B. (2005). Introduction to Globalization and Business: Relationships and Responsibilities. London: Sage Publications.