Introduction
In the era of globalization, one of the new agenda’s critical features is the workforce’s migration in search of better conditions and comfort. This phenomenon is called expatriation and characterizes the convergence of diverse cultures. Different environments have distinctive features in general, so competent expatriation requires cultural study. This problem is especially relevant when large companies expand into foreign markets — in this case; the company must ensure maximum adaptability of business strategies to minimize threats and weaknesses (Tarique et al., 2015). This paper explores the scenario of the expatriation of an adult employee of the California fictional company BurgerX to the position of the lead project manager in Moscow, Russia, to open a local branch of the enterprise. A discussion of the cultural differences and similarities between U.S. and Russian corporate values takes precedence for this scenario and is, therefore, the purpose of this paper.
National Cultures of the United States and Russia
General Information about the Enterprise
A comparative study between the two countries in which business is expected to take place must be conducted to critically examine the aspects related to the recognition and absorption of alternative cultural environments. A comparative analysis, in turn, requires a thorough examination of each country against common criteria to create a vivid description and parallel comparison. This is a critical step to decide the extent of the gap between two cultures according to predetermined factors, be they political, ethnic, socioeconomic, or technological statuses. This section discusses in detail two selected cultures, one of which is the parent for the business being described and the other is a subsidiary, that is, new in terms of market presence. Thus, the United States is considered the original environment, and a critical analysis of the local, and national culture is given for that country. On the contrary, Russia is regarded as a subsidiary market for the expansion of the company in question, so the discussion of this country in the prism of the same criteria that were in the case of the USA is of fundamental importance for qualitative research work related to the phenomenon of expatriation.
The primary role in this paper is played by the description of the chosen type of company, which has the desire to expand into the Russian market. Specifically, it is about a large company named BurgerX, a sizeable famous fast-food supplier in many regions of the United States. BurgerX produces and sells burgers, drinks, and snacks through a network of retail branches based on a unique family recipe and is highly popular in the local food service industry. This company has been around for 40 years since it opened its first cafe in San Bernardino, Calif. Since then, several generations of the firm’s CEOs have changed, and the number of U.S. branches has reached 2,488. Its total number of employees, including direct points of sale and administrative offices, exceeds 11,000; thus, it is categorized as a large business. Overall, customers love BurgerX and often go there with family or friends because the company offers great deals on combo sets and large portions. This is a great marketing move for BurgerX as they manage to sell more burgers, snacks, and drinks at a cost-effective price. In turn, this has put the company in an excellent financial position as BurgerX posted its third consecutive quarter of record sales. Additionally, the company has shown an overall successful financial performance through increased net income for the past twelve years. Figure 1 clearly shows that BurgerX’s net income has had almost linear growth, with some declines due to either a drop in aggregate demand, the effects of the crises, or a local decline in competitiveness.
Thus, BurgerX has sufficient resources and popularity among customers, stable financial growth, and a well-established coordination network. Customers love the chain and frequent it. The remarkable success in the U.S. market, set up for forty years, made the company’s management think about expanding into other markets. It is a direct continuation of this business by opening the first Russian branches, given that the company is a native American. The idea of expansion does not seem questionable or unreasonable because, in the context of globalization, companies often seek to explore new international sectors and thus maximize profits (Quain, 2018). This is a natural form of business development when interstate relations intensify, so it is not surprising that many companies that have achieved commercial success in one industry market try to replicate it in foreign sectors.
Exploring American Culture
In discussing the key points and essential aspects of expansion, it is necessary to elaborate on the original market, which became the foundation for forming the company’s original corporate philosophy and values. A combination of aspects, whether political, historical, or socioeconomic forces, shape the national culture of the United States (Tarique et al., 2015). It is important to understand the historical context: America was not originally Europeanized and belonged to the aboriginal tribes of North American Indians (Bancroft, 1874). However, the arrival of progressive colonizers significantly changed the local flow of life. At the same time, the remoteness of the centralized government from the immediate political scene eventually led to the emergence of revolutionary sentiments among the already-settled American invaders and civil war. For this reason, American culture has a unique trait: It does not copy anyone else’s successes or history but forms its narrative. The European and Aboriginal components laid in the foundation contributed to a spirit of diversity and diversity in the United States that is still relevant today. Moreover, the industry’s growth was robust in the colonized United States during the industrial age: many new economic goods were created, and the structure of political and social culture was markedly changed during this time. Because of this, the U.S. tends to be innovative and inventive (HI, 2021). American citizens like to create companies that help humanity while being commercially successful. It is all part of the embedded cultural code of American optimism that keeps public morale and spirits up and keeps the country from falling into another major crisis. Finally, about the historical background, once the U.S. became a strong, progressive power, the vector of political development reoriented toward using available resources, including cheap labor, from poor regions. As a result of its increased global influence, the U.S. has become a leader in many key aspects, and its local currency, the USD, has become the foundation for capital investment in most of the world (Best, 2021). Thus, by now, the U.S. national culture is characterized as unique, inimitable, focused on innovation and personal gain, and influential.
A valuable tool to create a complete picture of U.S. organizational culture is the Hofstede method. In simple words, this method allows us to evaluate people’s behavior and clarify the characteristics of diverse cultures based on the analysis of the original four components of the system (HI, 2021). To date, this technique has evolved so that six dimensions are now used. The first is power distance, which characterizes the social acceptance of inequality between superiors and subordinates. The United States is characterized by a moderate value of this indicator, which means that the opinion and influence of subordinate workers can be considered and used in making organizational decisions. Because this indicator is low, American parents do not care as much about their child’s obedience as they do about their parenting, while students value academic independence. At the same time, moderate power distance shows that employees of local companies do not like to be strictly directed and controlled in every action, and supervisors often do not distance themselves from the workgroup but can also be involved in corporate tasks. Crucially, highly skilled professionals under this arrangement are not prone to authoritarian and conservative values but instead are open to change and innovation. Perhaps, therefore, change management as part of the corporate culture is universally recognized in American companies.
The second criterion, according to Hofstede, is the tendency of the culture to individualism. It is worth saying that America shows a critically high value for this criterion (91), from which several conclusions can be drawn. Average workers in the United States value their comfort and independence exceptionally highly and are not inclined to work in teams, although they can if production requires it. The personal life and relationships of the individual are placed much higher than the company’s corporate interests, and this becomes the motivating force for the comparatively rapid career growth of local employees. It is inherent in leading employees to be leaders, which forms the general corporate spirit of movement and development. Another criterion is the degree of masculinity characteristic of a given society. According to Hofstede, masculinity in the U.S. is advanced and reaches 62 (HI, 2021). This parameter signifies the presence of a gender gap in labor tasks. At the same time, a high score on this metric signifies the degree of acceptance of competition among society. A high score specific to the United States shows that competition is critical to the United States, with success in any industry decided by the winner. This shapes the general American drive, in contrast to the empathy and caring characteristic of low-masculinity countries.
Hofstede’s fourth dimension is the perception of uncertainty. This indicator reflects the need to plan one’s future and have a clear narrative structure versus being spontaneous and intuitive. The U.S. has an average score of 46 in this sense, showing a general lack of need for a clear plan for U.S. companies. This translates into an acknowledgment of the freedoms of the other and a willingness to actively listen to their opinions, which has the potential to influence corporate behavior strategy. In contrast to cultures with a high uncertainty avoidance index, the U.S. does not need many rules and is more emotionally restrained in critical situations requiring spontaneity and non-obviousness. Related to this parameter is the criterion of long-term orientation, which, as its name implies, describes the property of culture to make long-term plans and to have savings for future life. In countries with a low level of future orientation, which is true of the United States, people have little concern about the future and live for one day, trying to get the maximum benefit now. This is expressed, among other things, in people’s willingness to work in small companies whose prospects for financial growth are not prominent. In the same sense, society is always ready for change, change of scenery, and relocation, which corresponds to the natural desire of corporate leaders to develop the company. Finally, Hofstede’s final criterion for discussing American culture is an indulgence, which evaluates the ability to encourage the individual’s creative impulses, freedoms, and desires against established social norms (HI, 2021). The U.S. scores sixty-eight on this criterion, reflecting their high cultural indulgence. The encouragement of desires can be socially dangerous due to a high propensity for drug addiction and the performance of immoral acts.
Thus, in drawing a line under the national culture of the United States in the context of BurgerX, it should be said that America is a freedom-loving, independent, and individualistic country focused on success and winning. Society strives to be first by all measures, which is expressed, among other things, in BurgerX’s desire to expand. Thus, this need is dictated by the desire to improve competitiveness and increase profits, which corresponds to the personal interests of company executives and the general inclination to professional evolution. All the above laid the foundation for BurgerX’s corporate values in America, but its transition to the Russian market can be complicated if its local organizational mentality has excellent differences from the American one. Consequently, it is critical to discuss Russian culture using the same Hofstede criteria used earlier.
A Study of Russian Culture
Unlike the United States, Russia has a long history, with many distinct phases, from feudal serfdom and communist rule to the era of a modern country with a penchant for innovation and economic growth. Historical overtones play an essential role in Russian society, so traditionality, conservatism, and continuity are important local population features. Russia has stable GDP growth (Figure 2), and economic growth, according to RS (2021), reaches the 10.8% mark. These are moderate figures: Russia does not have an extremely progressive economy or set up social policies, so poverty, unemployment, and economic crime are common. In addition, Russia is one of the first countries in terms of elevated levels of corruption and its recognition, which means that Russian society understands the authorities’ potential for theft and fraud. However, this does not prevent large companies from conquering the Russian market: most multinational companies have branches there. Regarding the food service industry, Russia is a strategically important market for McDonald’s, KFC, or Burger King, which are global players in the industry market (Higginson, 2017). Consequently, BurgerX has an excellent potential to tap into this market and thereby expand its field of influence, but this requires considering the local cultural code of Russian society.
In terms of Hofstede’s criteria, Russia has several unique characteristics due to its historical heritage. The Russian market is characterized by a high percentage of foreign migrant workers, especially those from Central Asia, as is the case with Mexicans and Chinese in the United States (HRW, 2020). At the same time, Russians do not have a high interest in the company’s development but tend to sacrifice their interests for professional gain. The criterion of individualism in the case of Russia is noticeably lower than in the United States, reaching a mark of thirty-nine, as shown in Figure 3. This means that Russian society is collective and commanding: locals like to organize into working groups and build relationships. On the power distance measure, Russia has a score of 93, which is about 2.3 times higher than the United States. Consequently, Russians recognize social inequality and cannot engage in discussions and contradict corporate leaders in the United States.
In terms of masculinity, Russia has a lower score than the United States, which means that constant competition and the desire to be first are not crucial for local communities. It can be assumed that the average Russian dreams of a comfortable life but is not ready to take the severe initiative to achieve it. At the same time, Russia has a shallow indulgence rate, which means that rigid social norms characterize a local society. Russians cannot fully satisfy their interests and realize their bold desires the way Americans do. This is due to a strong conservatism of civil rights. Russia lacks full recognition of sexual minorities, and members of LGBTQ+ communities are not respected there, especially in the Caucasian republics (Lokshina, 2021). Thus, expatriate members of the LGBTQ+ community may have difficulty staying comfortably in Russia, and BurgerX should consider this.
Finally, two related metrics need to be examined: perception of uncertainty and long-term orientation. For both metrics, Russia has exceptionally high levels, 95 and 81, respectively, from which some conclusions can be drawn. Russians can feel seriously threatened by any uncertainty and deviation from the plan. Instructions of all kinds, lectures, rules, and obligations are widespread in Russian companies. At the same time, Russians are extremely pragmatic people who tend to make long-term plans. Unlike the United States, Russia is under greater socioeconomic strain, forcing the local population to save and make contingency plans. Russia has already experienced defaults, financial crises, and coups d’état in the 1990s, so generations remember how important it is to be protected (Rowland, 2018). This orientation is expressed, among other things, in the strong continuity of tradition as the foundation that brings certainty to a changing world.
There are both similar and different elements between the national cultures of the United States and Russia. On the one hand, Russia is a more conservative environment with a significant historical legacy than the young American culture with a clear tendency toward neoliberalism. At the same time, both countries have solid geopolitical influence and encourage labor migration: they are open to foreign capital. By Hofstede’s criteria, Russia and the United States had opposite characteristics. Whereas the US is a tolerant country with a strong acceptance of competition and individualism, Russia is a more traditional collective environment. These differences need to be kept in mind when BurgerX management decides to expand its commercial influence in a foreign market. Keeping an American value system can be dangerous for the Russian branch of the company because European society is different. It is necessary to ensure that the business is perfectly adapted to the local agenda if the company management is interested in financial and reputational growth.
Expatriate
Expatriation is an essential property of the world in the era of globalization, characterizing the exchange of human capital between countries in search of better economic and social conditions. People voluntarily agree to expatriate if the standard of living in the donor country satisfies their needs more than in their home country. In this scenario, expatriation means that an American BurgerX employee and his family deliberately move to Russia to set up the management of the new enterprise. The expatriate, in this case, is a key employee who preaches the corporate values and mission of BurgerX in the new fields. This section discusses a fictional character named Donald L. Castelli, who decided to become a Russian-American ex-pat.
Several key points must be discussed about the biographical details of the ex-pat. Donald L. Castelli is a white U.S. citizen born March 9, 1964. The man’s national ID is 306-20-2819; he is originally from Arriba, Colorado, but has lived in San Bernardino for twenty-three years. At BurgerX, Castelli holds the position of lead project manager, so his role in developing the foreign market is critical. The man has signed a three-year contract under which he and his family are moving to Moscow, Russia, to launch a local BurgerX branch. In return, the company takes care of the expat’s financial worries about rent and relocation and pays the man a steady salary of $84,000 plus bonuses if he successfully moves the project forward. Castelli has a master’s degree in project and operations management from CSU, and the topic of his master’s thesis was “Measuring the Characteristics of an Effective Leader for a Changing Workplace Environment in an Era of Globalization.” Castelli is an excellent BurgerX employee and has been in the employee of the year booth several times. Before BurgerX, Castelli worked in the automotive industry, but tired of the constant pressure from the management; he left for an up-and-coming food service company. Thus, Castelli’s total tenure at BurgerX is 17 years, and during that time, Castelli has made good career progression.
In terms of foreign experience, Castelli has never launched in other markets before; part of the reason he volunteered to become an ex-pat. Personal interest and desires for professional development led Castelli to leave American life and try to establish himself in the Russian market, carrying the mission and vision of BurgerX to the local community. However, Castelli had previously visited Moscow as part of a European tour with his family. They visited several major European capitals, including London, Paris, Warsaw, Helsinki, Madrid, and Moscow. In general, Castelli considers Moscow and Russia to be an up-and-coming markets for launching a new company and is satisfied with the local standard of living. To his colleagues, Castelli likes to talk about the historical heritage of Russia and the period of monarchical rule of the House of Romanov, which was another motivating factor for his voluntary expatriation.
Expatriate Family
Donald L. Castelli is a married man on his second marriage with a total of three children. As a young man, he married a young American, from whose marriage they had two children. The eldest daughter, Margaret B., aged thirty-six, already has a family and lives in New York City with her husband. The middle child, William L., age twenty-five, recently graduated from CSU with a degree in international relations management and wants a job with local companies. At age 36, Castelli married a second time to Sandra E. Kratochvil, who has Slavic roots. More specifically, Sandra’s grandmother is from Poland, so the woman is aware of life in European communities. Sandra is 48 years old and has a college degree in nursing. She has worked for six years as a senior nurse at a local clinic, Metropolitan Family Medical Clinics, Inc., but COVID-19 has caused her work practice to become much more difficult. Sandra is forced to constantly stay late at work and work overtime and work functions that were not originally part of her contract. Although this pays well, the woman feels that she is entering a phase of professional burnout and wants to solve this problem as soon as possible. In her free time, before COVID-19, Sandra loved going to the theater and reading books: she hopes to get to know the famous art culture of Russia and read Tolstoy in his original language. From her marriage to Sandra, Donald has a young child, young Norma H., aged seventeen. Norma has just graduated from high school and is now thinking about going to university. The decision to expatriate her father came as a surprise to her because, as a minor child, Norma must go with her parents to Moscow. So, Norma is not against this decision, but she does not know anything about Russian culture and universities, so she will have to study it thoroughly to continue her education in Russia. That said, Norma has never been outside of the U.S. and has no experience with international travel. She does not know the Russian language and is not even familiar with the history of this country. Norma is aware of Russian politics and culture through social media, particularly TikTok, but has not learned anything added before.
In terms of voluntary expatriation, it is only about the new Castelli family, including Sandra and Norma. Both family members have reacted positively to the news of the move and have even taken the initiative in organizational matters. The Castelli’s are a little concerned that neither speaks Russian, so it may be difficult for them to adjust to the new culture. The general management of BurgerX has promised to help the Castelli family learn the new language by hiring tutors in Russia and supplying round-the-clock translator help if needed. That said, the time zone difference will complicate communication between Russia and the U.S. When it is 9 a.m. in California, it will be 7 p.m. in Moscow, preventing effective communication between the two markets. As a solution to this problem, BurgerX asked Castelli to send an e-mail to management each workday with the results and problems of the day so that each morning Castelli would have a response from the company. Castelli has lofty expectations, so the company is willing to supply complete support to ensure the most seamless expatriate experience possible.
Comparing Contexts
As said at the outset, only a comparative analysis of the two markets has the guaranteed potential to maximize the benefits of a company’s expansion. It is impossible to achieve ideal economic conditions if the company keeps original attitudes and strategies for the foreign market. Advertising designed for the mentality of freedom-loving Americans will seem strange and not sell to Russians, which means it is critical to adapt the business to local realities fully. This, in turn, is a complex process that cannot be done by simply informing Castelli about what Russia is. Adaptation, combined with change management, forms the backbone of Castelli’s work, so the man will have to learn many vital aspects. These include leadership styles, work communication formats, patterns of social morality, and training. Each of the aspects mentioned characterizes a particular part of business practice, and conducting a meta-analysis creates a broad description of corporate behavior specific to a particular culture. Thus, through an in-depth study of all aspects, it is possible to say what corporate management is like in the United States and Russia. In turn, comparing these descriptions makes it possible to find the critical differences that must be considered when trying to expand an enterprise.
Leadership Style
The first thing to say is that leadership is a dynamic complex with no standard rules or instructions. Leadership, in general, should be understood as an individual’s social influence through which the leader can gain the support and trust of subordinates necessary to achieve a common goal (Leithwood et al., 2020). Lessons that are effective for the United States may be utterly useless for Russia. At the same time, Russian leadership that performs well in the local market may not be suited to the U.S. agenda and culture. Moreover, even within one country and one company, several different leadership styles can be found. For this reason, this section discusses a stereotypical, average leadership typical of the United States and Russia in general.
American culture fully supports the directive style of leadership, which is characterized by the involvement and participation of management, while in Russia, the leader is usually seen as an isolated person with much weight of influence. American leadership is known for the charisma and openness of individuals: top employees there tend to communicate easily with their subordinates. It is natural for them to find out how personal things are with members of the workgroup, although the sincerity of this question is not always absolute (Khazan, 2017). This is a collaborative person who has a clear goal and is willing to do everything possible so that each team member contributes as much as possible to achieve that goal. Leaders in the U.S. tend to inspire and motivate their employees and be humane and fair to them. The overall focus of such a leader is thus aimed at empowering employees to achieve the goal (Duggan, 2020). In Russia, leadership has distinctive characteristics. As a rule, the leader there is seen as the unconditionally main person in the team, who has the right of decisive action. Any team results must always be agreed upon and approved by the Russian leader. This is an authoritarian leadership style in which the individual has little interest in the personality of his subordinates but instead strives to achieve the desired result. Much of the motivation, as a result, is due either to pressure from higher management or to a desire to prove excellent performance and get a promotion. In a sense, Russian leaders are indeed trying to copy Russia’s chief executive, President Putin, who is characterized by calculating, fair brutality, and toughness (Troianovski, 2018). In addition, it is difficult to imagine that a line employee could approach the Russian leader about a personal issue or discuss any abstract topics.
Communication Style
There is a considerable gap in the study of effective communication styles between the United States and Russia. Well-functioning communication is one of the main tools of competent business practice, while the lack of adequate interaction between employees, whether horizontal or vertical, is often the cause of the corporate crisis (Pasovska & Miceski, 2018). Several classic communication styles have some stereotypical images of how corporate employees communicate in the United States and Russia.
America is characterized by direct, precise communication devoid of excessive emotionality, while Russians tend to be more likely to be more benevolent with close colleagues. Although American hypocrisy is well-known and quick conversations between employees are not out of the question, U.S. residents appreciate simplicity and reliability in crucial business dealings. Direct communication does not mean ruthlessness or unfair criticism; however: it is the American tradition to smooth over conflicts and keep the conversation as neutral as possible. If employees are not close friends, they limit themselves to common phrases but do not cross the personal boundaries so respected in the United States. However, even if a personal workplace conversation ensues between coworkers, there is usually a taboo on relationships, income, religion, or politics (HSBC, 2021). The situation is the opposite for the industry of Russian companies: unlike their American counterparts, Russian employees tend to be more friendly. Although there is a well-known prejudice about the harshness and insularity of the Russian people, this is only true with strangers. Friendly relationships are often created between coworkers at work, and these relationships are expressed through spending time together, not only at the workplace. It is natural for Russian employees to organize a meeting in a bar, restaurant, or other public places with the work team and discuss non-work-related issues. The closest employees may discuss taboo topics in the U.S.: relationships, family problems, politics, and religion. The style of communication between horizontal employees is rarely formal and is primarily friendly and welcoming. In contrast, more formal communication between subordinates and the leader is mostly limited to discussing work issues only. At the same time, while the American style of communication regards compromise as the apogee of human interaction, for the Russian employee only convincing his opponent of what is right, and compromise can be seen as a weakness.
In terms of communication, approaches differ as well. In the American business environment, many critical issues can be discussed by e-mail or even by phone. It is only natural for a BurgerX executive to call Castelli and ask something important now, while a call might seem like an act of rudeness for a Russian company. If the issue at hand is not so urgent, employees choose face-to-face meetings as alternatives to digital communication (LREU, 2018). During face-to-face communication, Russians do not keep a considerable physical distance and may even hug and touch each other if the degree of intimacy between them allows it. In contrast, Americans tend to keep 1-1.5 meters to delineate everyone’s boundaries (LREU, 2018). This forms a substantial gap between communication styles. For BurgerX, this means that human resource management models need to be adapted to the realities of the Russian mentality, or else business adaptation may fail.
Models of Public Morality
To understand a society, it is necessary to examine the facets of its public morality. The best measure of any society is to examine its relationship to what is bad and what is good. For example, Afghan morality with the rise of the Taliban proves Islamic values that would seem incomprehensible to Westerners. In this respect, Russia and the United States are much more culturally closer: both states are either secular, or most of the population preaches Christianity, though different denominations (Rowland, 2018). However, there are also visible differences between the American and Russian environments concerning public morality, which is the subject of this section.
Primarily, it should be recalled that American culture is more liberal and willing to innovate, which cannot be said about Russian culture. For this reason, Western culture already recognizes the rights of social minorities and so welcomes the apology to the slavery of the black population over the centuries. Notably, Russia also developed a system of slavery, but no one expects an official apology to former serfs (Rowland, 2018). That said, personal gain and self-interest are highly valued in the United States: this is the good side (Beck, 2016). The Machiavellian morality of “the end justifies the means” works well for the local community, with people not inclined to sacrifice themselves for others. In Russia, the situation is different on average: compassion and benevolence, because of collectivism, are more important than the interests of the individual. This may be why charitable foundations and online fundraisers for the treatment of sick children are so common in Russia, while in the United States, the initiative comes mostly from government agencies (Rothrock, 2016). Both public morals are similar in their belief in personal superiority. More specifically, American and Russian groups are characterized by being chosen, unique, and inimitable. This trait of mentality decides the nation’s behavior in international teams, so BurgerX must use this similarity for its management.
What is bad for both societal morals are the unambiguous enemies of humanity: terrorism, corruption, and poverty. Both Americans and Russians do not recognize these problems, especially given similar scenarios of terrorist attacks in the early 21st century (Hedenskog, 2020). Counterterrorism is of federal importance to both nations, and this need is embedded in the nation’s genetic code. On the other hand, to the American person, crossing personal boundaries and communicating with colleagues off-topic may seem rude and impudent, while Russian morality perceives such behavior as an act of benevolence and an attempt to make friends. At the same time, acts of racism, sexism, and harassment are unequivocally evil in the United States, while Russian society is not yet ready to react so sharply to such problems.
Training
Employee training is critical to corporate culture success. Training forms a system of tools that allows newcomers to gain helpful knowledge and embrace the values, experiences, and missions of the company they work for (Soni et al., 2017; Tarique et al., 2015). It is even clear that without corporate training, a company cannot expect to be an absolute success because internal structures will be fragmented, and it will take longer for new employees to adapt. For Americans, training is a way to advance professionally and become intimately familiar with the company culture (Borzykowski, 2017). Training for American companies is a mandatory procedure before starting a new job, regardless of physical or intellectual resources. In Russia, there is no such serious need for training: when a new employee is hired, their skills are clarified, after which he can start at once work. Training as a transfer of corporate values is not common in small companies because the employee is expected to develop a unique understanding of the company’s culture over time. In addition, company finances and time are spent on employee training, which managers are not highly interested in. That said, training is critical in positions that require specialization and in large companies.
Recommendations for the Expatriate
Hiring
Castelli should familiarize himself with local HRM regulations in deciding to hire employees for a new BurgerX branch in Moscow. New employees are rarely recruited through print ads or newspaper advertisements: instead, job seekers use the hh.ru job search platform (Palin, 2020). Castelli recommends using this platform and paying particular attention to job duties and salary when posting a job. If a company is not a well-known global brand, the lack of a salary listed can be a discouraging factor. In addition, Russian people are very punctual, so personal interviews are always held at the exact time: pauses and delays can also hurt the credibility of applicants. It is also recommended to have a professional interpreter to make sure the advertisement’s text is written in flawless Russian.
Training and Development
Unlike Americans, Russians are not as loyal to training and mostly see it as a coercive measure. Training, however, is necessary – for this reason, Castelli recommends developing an excellent training incentive system and showing that the probationary period pays well. Russians do not want to work for free, so any work they do should be rewarded. In addition, the original system of corporate training in Russia is not as consistent and systematic as in the U.S., so in local companies, the internship may end up spontaneously. Castelli recommends creating training that does not take long but allows the critical points of the job to be fully transferred to the U.S. company. At the same time, Russians should be fully aware of the benefits of the training, so it is recommended to pay generously.
Family Considerations
Russians are not as selfish as Americans, so they can sacrifice time and resources to fulfill a work plan if they understand the benefits of such behavior. If production requires it, Castelli should offer employees good overtime pay or bonuses if the employee must perform more of their duties despite family. That said, weekends are sacred to the Russian, and bothering an employee on their days off is improper, destructive behavior for management only if the Russian does not understand the distinct benefit of such bother. For Castelli personally, adjusting to Russia will take time and energy, which can affect family well-being. It is recommended that BurgerX take complete charge of the Castelli family and provide them with the finances and resources they need to stay out of trouble. As previously said, having a personal interpreter and cultural guide will smooth the edges from the adjustment and improve the Castelli family’s well-being. In addition, if possible, it is recommended to help the Castelli family members to assimilate into Moscow: Norma wants to go to a local university, and Sandra wants to become more familiar with the theater culture.
Returning to the Community
As has been said, the period of work in Russia will not exceed three years according to the plan, which means that by 2025 there will be a question of the Castelli family returning to the American environment. This could be a problem because it would cause cultural conflict. English language courses and American culture lessons would hardly be needed for this family, but help with household coordination might be necessary. To alleviate this problem, the expat family would need to be gone during the transition: provide temporary housing in California, help with relocation, to minimize stress on the Castelli’s. Also, the Castelli family may want to stay in Russia: BurgerX should keep that in mind and have a backup choice for the time being. If Castelli stays in Moscow, BurgerX should use that to its maximum advantage. For example, give Castelli a steady top management position if the market expansion plan proves successful. Among other things, it would be an excellent motivation for the ex-pat to try harder and show results.
Conclusion
Expatriation has become a natural branch of the evolution of the globalizing world. When nations integrate and develop international relations, labor migration is no surprise. This paper has examined how the expatriation of a leading Castelli project manager from the United States to Russia can be realized. In this procedure, examining cultural contrasts is critical to ensure a guarantee of success. Each company requires adaptation of its strategies and corporate resources to the specific market, which is vital in the face of cultural differences. It has been shown that the U.S. and Russia, although they have significant similarities, represent dissimilar cultures. This is clear on the political, religious, moral, and socioeconomic levels.
References
Beck, J. (2016). Understanding America’s moral divides. The Atlantic.
Rowland, D. (2018). Why authoritarian rule is not Russia’s history — or destiny: Russia’s rulers had great power, but they also had to be merciful and just. Washington Post.
Bancroft, G. (1874). History of the United States. Little, Brown, and Company.
Best, R. (2021). How the U.S. dollar became the world’s reserve currency. Investopedia.
Borzykowski, B. (2017). Training is often seen as a bore and a chore. Is there a way to make it better? BBC.
Duggan, T. (2020). What are differences & similarities between american leadership styles & global leadership styles? Chron.
Hedenskog, J. (2020). Russia and international cooperation on counter-terrorism. FOI, 4916, 1-50.
HI. (2021). Country comparison. Hofstede Insights.
Higginson, T. (2017). Russia’s fast-food market: Resilient & robust. ITE F&D.
HRW. (2020). Russia: As pandemic grows, migration detention deadlock. HRW.
HSBC. (2021). How Americans do business. BBC. Web.
Khazan, O. (2017). Why Americans smile so much. The Atlantic.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5-22.
Lokshina, T. (2021). No end to Chechnya’s violent anti-gay campaign. HRW.
LREU. (2018). Cultural differences between Russia and the USA. Learn Russian in the EU.
O’Neill, A. (2021). Gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate in Russia 2026. Statista.
Palin, V. (2020). HeadHunter Russia. The Network. Web.
Pasovska, S., & Miceski, T. (2018). Practicing proper business communication to achieve higher company performance [PDF document].
Quain, S. (2018). The advantages of expanding business. Chron.
Rothrock, K. (2016). From charity to treason How Russia’s philanthropists went from heroes to traitors. Meduza.
RS. (2021). Russia’s economic growth accelerated to 10.9% y/y in May. Reuters.
Soni, H., Tripathy, L. K., & Biswal, M. L. (2017). An overview of the importance of training- literature review. SaiBalaji International Journal of Management Sciences, 1(V), 127-137.
Tarique, I., Briscoe, D. R., & Schuler, R. (2015). International human resource management: Policies and practices for multinational enterprises. Routledge.
Troianovski, A. (2018). Branding Putin. Washington Post.