Eine Einführung ins interkulturelle und transkulturelle Management

INHALT

1. STRUKTUR UND KULTUR DES MENSCHEN
Die Entstehung des Kulturprofils
Bewusstseinsarchitektur und Kultur
Architektur der kulturellen Ebenen in verschiedenen Tiefen
Die Beziehung zwischen expliziter und impliziter Bewusstseinsarchitektur

2. THE STATE- OF-THE-ART OF INTERCULTURAL RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT – AND ITS FUTURE 16
1. A synopsis of modern intercultural studies
2. The transcultural profiler
3. The epistemological foundation of the dynamic of the transcultural dimension
4. Model for the management of the change of the intercultural paradigm

3. THE TRANSCULTURAL PROFILER: THE UNIVERSAL CULTURE MANAGEMENT MODEL
Model, legend, explanations, correlations

4. SYNOPSIS OF INTER-/TRANSCULTURAL MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENT

5. INTER-/TRANSCULTURAL REFERENCE TERMINOLOGY
INTER- AND TRANSCULTURAL REFERENCES

Interkulturelles- u. Transkulturelles Management (German)

Intercultural &Transcultural Management (English)

Gestion Interculturelle et Gestion Transculturelle (French)

Gerencia Intercultural y Gerencia Transcultural (Spanish)

Gerência Intercultural e Gerência Transcultural (Portuguese)

跨文化的智慧精髓 - kua wen hua de zhi hui jing sui (Chinese)

транскультурная компетенция - transkulturnaja

kompetencija (Russian)

toransukaruchā 　・ manējimento (Japanese)

トランスカルチャー　・　マネジメント

Vishua Chaytana (Sanskrit)

ZAKAA AL-TA'ALOF AL-THAQAFEE (Arabic)

1 Struktur und Kultur des Menschen

Kultur entsteht in der Wechselwirkung zwischen Individuen und ihrem Umfeld in der Zeit – der primären, sekundären und tertiären Sozialisierung - deren Produkt im Gedächtnis gespeichert wird und daher sowohl die Wahrnehmung der Gegenwart als auch die Erwartungen hinsichtlich der Zukunft bedingt.

Kulturdefinition

Über meine obige Kulturdefinition hinaus gibt es hunderte von Definitionen des Wortes Kultur. Zeitgenössische und inbezug auf das globale Management relevante prägnante Kulturdefinitionen sind unter anderen

1. Hofstedes Definition der Kultur als „mentale Software“ oder „kollektive mentale Programmierung, die eine Menschengruppe von einer anderen unterscheidet“ („software of the mind“ oder „collective mental programming that differentiates one group of people from another“). Sein 5D Kulturmodell ist online oder in den Publikationen dieses Autors verfügbar.

2. Trompenaars und Hampden-Turners Definition der Kultur als „Problem- und Dilemmalösungsstrategien einer Gruppe von Menschen“ („the way in which a group of people solves problems and reconciles dilemmas“). Das 7D Kulturmodell dieser Autoren ist online oder in den Publikationen dieser Autoren verfügbar.

3. Halls Definition der Kultur als „Kommunikation“ (communication). Das 4D Kulturmodell von Hall und Hall ist gleichermaßen in den bereits erwähnten Ressourcen einsehbar.

4. Vor allem im komplexen organisationalen Kontext entsteht Kultur, laut Brannen und Salk, im Wege der Verhandlung; ein verhandlungsbasiertes Kulturverständnis. Das Kulturverständnis dieser Autorinnen ist beispielsweise in einer in der Bibliographie angeführten Jointventure Fallstudie eben dieser Autorinnen dargelegt.

Die Kulturdefinitionen und Modelle dieser 4 interkulturellen Forschungsgenerationen sind paradigmatisch im Kapitel 2 systematisiert.

5. Das von mir in dieser Erörterung formulierte transkulturelle Kulturverständnis integriert das gesamte kulturelle Forschungsacquis im Kontext eines ganzheitlichen Menschenverständnisses in wissenschaftlich konsistenter Weise. Siehe insbes. Kapitel 3.

Anm.: Details zu den jeweiligen Kulturmodellen und Autoren findet der Leser auch im inter- und transkulturellen Management Referenzwörterbuch im Kapitel 5 dieses Buches.

Die Entstehung des Kulturprofils

Kultur wird im Wege der primären Sozialisierung im Elternhaus, der sekundären in der Schule und der tertiären im Arbeitsleben erworben. Unter Zuhilfenahme der Universal-Kulturmanagement Landkarte auf Seite 24ff lässt sich folgendes feststellen: Das Kulturprofil eines Menschen setzt sich zunächst entsprechend seiner Konditionierung im wesentlichen aus Variablen der Ebenen D6 des Individualkulturprofils (dem man weitere hinzufügen kann) und D7 des Nationalkulturprofils, sowie auch der Ebene D8 des Kommunikationsprofils, ersichtlich im integrierten transkulturellen Profiler zusammen. Die diversen Kulturgruppen, allen voran die nationale, denen jemand angehört, stiften Identität, verleihen Orientierung und bedingen dessen Werte, Einstellungen und Verhaltensweisen. Je nach Situation kann die eine oder andere Gruppenzugehörigkeit jeweils auschlaggebender sein. Nachfolgend die dreimal 12 Optionen der drei Ebenen oder Profile, die sein allgemeines Gesamtprofil annähernd bedingen, insbesondere wenn es noch durch die Einbeziehung weiterer Ebenen des Profilers, wie z. B. der der Evolution, Profilerebene 5 und der Ethik, Profilerebene D4 ein nuanciertes und differenziertes Profiling erfährt, denn ohne ein Minimum sozial erforderlicher Entwicklung auf diesen beiden Ebenen, erreicht der Mensch nicht seine spezifisch menschliche Statur, was alles soziokulturelle Denken und sei es wissenschaftlich noch so ausgefeilt, unter Umständen hinfällig macht. Eine hohe Entwicklung in diesen Bereichen gestattet es dagegen, den gordischen Knoten der intrapsychischen, interpersonalen, intergruppen und interkulturellen Knoten zu lösen und alle kulturellen Barrieren zu überwinden. Kulturelle Werte an sich sind wertneutral, was die kulturelle Relativität begründet. Fachlich-technische interkulturelle Kompetenz allein genügt nicht, um kulturelle Probleme nachhaltig zu lösen. Allein der Fortschritt in den Bereichen der Ethik und Evolution schafft die Voraussetzung für irreversibel effektives interkulturelles Management. Und diese Ethik und Evolution ist der Operationalisierung und Anwendung bedürftig um nachhaltig wirksam zu sein. Es versteht sich, dass für ein differenzierteres Profiling im globalen Managementkontext die dafür vorgesehenen übrigen Ebenen des Transkulturellen Profilers mit Managementrelevanz bedarfsorientiert einbezogen werden sollten.

D6, 1-12

ICP The Individual culture profile: Individualization of one's mental software by these variables

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

D7, 1-12

NCP National Culture Profile: Acquired through primary, secondary and tertiary socialization

1 Power distance: indicates the extent to which a society accepts the unequal distribution of power in institutions and organization

2 Uncertainty avoidance: refers to a society's discomfort with uncertainty, preferring predictability and stability

3 Individualism/collectivism: reflects the extent to which people prefer to take care of themselves and their immediate families, remaining emotionally independent from groups, organizations and other collectives.

4 Masculinity/femininity: reveals the bias towards either masculine values of assertiveness, competitiveness, and materialism, or towards feminine values of nurturing and the quality of life and relationships

5 Long-term orientation: refers to the extent to which past, present or future oriented attitudes, thought patterns, bahaviours and values are preferred' (Hofstede 5D- model, source: Bartlett, Ghoshal and Birkinshaw, Transnational Management 2003)

6 Universalism-particularism: seeks to discover one's prime allegiance to rules and rule-bound classifications or to the exceptional, unique circumstances and relationships

7 Individualism-communitarianism: measures the extent to which managers see the individual employee and shareholder as paramount, their development, enrichment, and fulfillment; or to what extent the corporation, customers and the wider community should be the beneficiaries of all personal allegiances

8 Specific-diffuse: measures the tendency to analyze, reduce and break down the field of experience or to synthesize, augment, and construct patterns of experience

9 Neutral versus affective: this concern the legitimacy to show emotions while at work

10 Inner-directed - outer-directed: concerns the 'locus of control.' Is it inside each of us, or outside in our environments to which we must adapt?

11 Achieved-ascribed status: refers to whether status is conferred to people on the basis of what they have achieved or because of what they are

12 Sequential-synchronous time: has to do with whether one sees time as passing in a sequence or coming round again and again' (THT 7D-model, source: Trompenaars, Hampden-Turner, Managing People Across Cultures 2005).

D8, 1-12

Communication styles profile

1 High context-low context: Is information in the explicit code or is it implicit in the person?

2 Controlled-free information flow: must be informed versus are already informed

3 Monochronic-polychronic: one thing at a time versus many things at a time

4 Private space-public space: privacy and territoriality versus open space, supportive of networking

5 Concise-elaborate: not talkative versus loquacious

6 Context-centered – person-centered: relevance of speaker and role relations between the parties versus relevance of speaker and the bridging of the communication gap

7 Direct-indirect: cooperativeness. say briefly and clearly what is true, relevant and needed versus indirectness and circumlocutions

8 Affective-neutral: appropriateness versus inappropriateness of expressing emotions in a professional context

9 Abstract-concrete: refers to how concrete one can be in communicating one's ideas?

10 Private-public information space: how healthy is it to give access to personal information in building business contacts?

11 Linear-circular: how linear can you be in conveying your point?

12 Intellectual-relational: the intellectual style can confront ideas but deals with relationships delicately, whereas the relational style deals with relational issues directly, and ideas more indirectly. (Based on Hall and Hall and N. Ewington, TCO London and Univ. of Cambridge).

Bewusstseinsarchitektur und Kultur

Die menschliche Bewusstseinsarchitektur kann in folgendem kulturellen Bewusstheitsmodell von Giddens veranschaulicht werden. Sie kann ihrerseits durch die Ebenen D1, D2 und D3 des transkulturellen Profilers, Seite 24, nach oben optimiert werden kann. Die Ebenen des Giddensschen Modells (siehe unten) sind:

1. Das diskursive Bewusstsein (analytische Kulturerkenntnis)
2. Das praktische Bewusstsein (latentes Kulturbewusstsein)
3. Das Unbewusste (verdrängtes Kulturbewusstsein)

Interkulturelle Kompetenzentwicklung erfordert, dass man die Ebene 2 des praktischen Bewusstseins und die Ebene 3 des Unbewussten auf der Ebene D1 des Giddensschen Modells integriert. Diese drei Ebenen diverser Kulturbewusstheitsgrade kann man wiederum in die höchsten Stufen der kulturellen Bewusstheit der Ebenen D1 bis D3 des transkulturellen Profilers integrieren und sie von einer höheren Ebene her steuern.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Architektur der mentalen Software

1. Persönlichkeit
2. Kultur
3. Natur

Geert Hofstede, der niederländische Pionier der interkulturellen Forschung (Cultures and Organisations. Software of the Mind, 2005), unterscheidet drei Ebenen der mentalen Programmierung, wie er es als ehemaliger IBM-Mitarbeiter nennt, die die Einzigartigkeit dieser kleinsten kulturellen Einheit, die der Mensch darstellt, ausmachen. Das nachfolgende Bild veranschaulicht die Hierarchie dieser Programme, die Ebenen der Einzigartigkeit der menschlichen mentalen Programmierung.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Abbildung: Ebenen der Einzigartigkeit der mentalen Programme

Quelle: Hofstede Geert und Hofstede Gert Jan, Cultures and Organisations. Software of the Mind, 2005

Alle Menschen, ohne kulturelle, geographische oder ethnische Einschränkung haben Teil an einer in der Ontogenese, die eine Replizierung der Phylogenese darstellt, verankerten, ererbten menschlichen Natur. Gefühle wie Liebe, Angst, usw. sind hier angesiedelt. Das ist der Sockel der Pyramide. Wie diese Gefühle zum Ausdruck gebracht werden, hängt von der Sozialisierung in der Gruppe und einmaligen Persönlichkeitsfaktoren ab. Jedes Individuum hat eine einzigartige Geschichte, Biographie und Erbanlagen. Die mentalen Programme der Spitze der Pyramide sind also ererbt und erlernt. Die Lern- und Erfahrungsprozesse in der Gruppe, der das Individuum von Geburt an angehört, stellen die kulturspezifische mentale Software bereit, die eine prägende Auswirkung auf die Ausformung der Persönlichkeit haben.

Doch die Ontogenese und die Phylogenese haben darüber hinaus noch eine universelle Bewusstseinsebene bereitgestellt, die insbesondere mit der Entwicklungsstufe der Ebene D5.6 Evolution - universelle Phase, im transkulturellen Profiler- einhergeht und den Zugang zu den höheren Stufen D1 bis D3 ermöglicht.

Die Architektur der kulturellen Ebenen in verschiedenen Tiefen

1. Werte
2. Rituale
3. Helden
4. Symbole

Eine weitere Sichtweise der Kultur wird im sogenannten Zwiebeldiagramm verdeutlicht. Es wird als solches bezeichnet, weil es gleich einer Zwiebel verschiedene Schichten in unterschiedlichen Tiefen kultureller Programmierung veranschaulicht.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Abbildung: Das Zwiebelmodell: Kulturmanifestation in verschiedenen Tiefen

Quelle: Hofstede Geert und Hofstede G. J., Cultures and Organisations, 2005

Darüber hinaus bringt Hofstede in diesem Modell den Unterschied zwischen Gesellschaftskultur und Organisationskultur auf einen klaren Nenner.

Die äußeren Schichten des Zwiebeldiagramms bestehen aus Symbolen, Helden und Ritualen, die unter dem Begriff kulturelle „Praktiken“ zusammengefasst werden können. Während in der Unternehmenskultur der Schwerpunkt auf den Praktiken liegt, sind die Werte das Spiegelbild der nationalen oder regionalen Gesellschaftskultur. Die Grundannahmen oder Grundwerte bilden Kern und Zentrum des Modells. Diese werden in der primären Sozialisierung in der Kindheit vermittelt und werden bereits in der frühen im Unbewussten verankert. Ob etwas sauber, schön, wahr oder gut ist im Gegensatz zu den entgegengesetzten Kategorien ist über diese Zeit hinaus schwerlich umzuerziehen. Dies macht auch die Adaptation in andern als der Ausgangskultur schwierig. Die Assimilation und Integration in anderen Zielkulturen ist deshalb schwierig, weil, besonders jenseits eines bestimmten Alters, die sehr früh erworbenen Grundannahmen für nicht Gruppenmitglieder schwer erlernbar sind. Im Gegensatz zu den Praktiken, die sichtbar, leichter erlern- und veränderbar sind, sind die Grundannahmen und Werte unsichtbar, implizit und schwerer veränderbar und veränderlich.

Soweit dieses wie auch andere Modelle im Mentalbereich angesiedelt sind können sie in ein erweitertes Bewusstseinsfeld integriert werden, welches die ersteren steuerbarer macht, sowohl intra-, als auch interindividuell, wie auch interkulturell.

Die Beziehung zwischen expliziter und impliziter kultureller Bewusstseinsarchitektur

1. Werte (implizit)
2. Verhaltensweisen (explizit)

Das Eisbergmodell ist eine monumentalere, plastischere, suggestive Gestalt des Zwiebelmodells unter Einbeziehung zweier interkultureller Akteure. Die Spitze des Eisbergs entspricht der sichtbaren Manifestation von Kultur, insbesondere den Verhaltensmustern. Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Abbildung Eisbergmodell

Quelle: Univ. Cambridge, Persönl. Arbeitsmaterialien des Autors, 2004

Die diese bedingenden Werte, die mentale Software oder die gruppenspezifische kollektive Programmierung, die allein imstande ist, diesen Verhaltensmustern Sinn zu geben, sie zu deuten und somit Falschattributionen zu vermeiden, befindet sich unsichtbar unterhalb des Wasserspiegels. Der Großteil davon ist unbewusst oder latent bewusst, implizit und unsichtbar wie der Zwiebelkern. Jede interkulturelle Arbeit erfordert daher eine Sensibilisierung für diese Dialektik des Manifestierten und des Nichtmanifestierten der Kultur. Idealerweise ist es die Fähigkeit wie F. Scott Fitzgerald sagt, „zwei entgegengesetzte Gedanken gleichzeitig im Bewusstsein zu haben und dennoch handlungsfähig zu bleiben“. Laut ihm ist das ein Kennzeichen vorzüglicher Intelligenz. Doch eigentlich müssen mindestens vier Dinge gleichzeitig im Bewusstsein präsent sein, da ja mindestens zwei Individuen an einem kulturübergreifenden Interfacing teilnehmen, das heißt zwei Verhaltens-/Handlungsebenen mit der jeweils dazugehörigen sinngebenden mentalen Software.

2 The state-of-the-art of intercultural research and management - and its future

In the following I would like to present two models, i.e. a synopsis of the brief history of intercultural research from a paradigmatic view point (page 23) and a transcultural profiler (page 24) as an integrative instrument for global management purposes.

The first, a synopsis of modern intercultural studies, integrates the successive generations of intercultural research that increasingly play back the ball of culture consciousness from the outer and a more mechanistic, instrumental understanding of culture into the inner space of the intercultural researcher and manager, who are thus endowed with a potentiality for the management of culture that can be actualized according to the level of culture consciousness of the cultural player and entails an increased cultural accountability as a corollary of increased cultural empowerment.

In the awareness of the causal interconnectedness of complementary inner spaces of awareness and consciousness and corollary outer spaces and of the governing principle in the totality of this field I have designed a Transcultural Profiler (page 24ff) that maps the psychological infrastructure of the transnational manager in the totality of the inner and outer management context. The 12 octaves architectural dome metaphor that highlights its anatomic-physiologic axiomatic (structural and functional governing principles) is a holistic instrument for intercultural research and management and a useful working hypothesis for any interculturalist, educator, researcher or practitioner who wants to go beyond intercultural minimalism. It structures the intercultural acquis purposefully by means of a scientifically derived transcultural add-on. It is composed - and indeed encompasses, with its 12 octaves all registers of the human cultural/inter-/transcultural psychology with their variations - of the following three hierarchized clusters of dimensions that highlight the ultimately all-integrative command, control and integration axiomatic of all that is cultural in man’s existence and provides the transcultural strategist with a useful synoptic, analytic, diagnostic, reference and management instrument:

1. Dimensional cluster C1: The domain of the transcultural space of consciousness: D 1 - D3

2. Dimensional cluster C 2: The transitional domain from intercultural to higher level transcultural awareness: D4 - D5

3. Dimensional cluster C3: The domain of the intercultural space of consciousness: D6 – D12

This 3-level structure can be visualized by the architectural dome metaphor that highlights the hierarchical integration of the complementary inter- and transcultural spaces of consciousness. More specifically, the subordinate intercultural space of consciousness is integrated by the more comprehensive hierarchically superordinate transcultural space of consciousness to the extent that the subject of intercultural management evolves from C3 via the interface cluster C2 towards the pinnacle of C1. Pointing to an intercultural evolution circle and spiral the dome metaphor can also be interpreted and applied as a template and roadmap for intercultural growth and evolution and therefore for assessment and training. The more one evolves towards C1 the more intercultural management potential can be actualized. The convergence of the diversity of the architectural metaphor’s arcs and the unity of the cupola and lantern symbolize the integration of diversity and unity.

In a way it is a physiological model for the management of culture that can usefully complement constructs like Bartlett's, Ghoshal's and Birkinshaw’s physiological model for change management in a global, transcultural context. And R. D. Laing specifies what they have in common, namely the primacy of the awareness rationale. Thus, the understanding of the anatomy of the psychological managerial infrastructure needs to be complemented by an insight into the axiomatic of its physiology. And once the active principles of inter-/transcultural consciousness are established a wider notion of cultural awareness and consciousness with their assumed creative dynamic can be translated into actual management practice by the global manager according to his level of culture consciousness. His level of integrity and evolution will provide a logic of checks and balances of the impact of the assumed quantum cultural effect.

And if the present hypothesis can be validated by intercultural research and practice, one has not only an instrument for the management of cultures but also of culture per se. Inner cultural integration can be followed by outer cultural integration.

Here follow the two models which have been announced:

1.A synopsis of modern intercultural studies, page 23, is a systematization of the paradigm shifts of the late twentieth century history of intercultural research that replicates the hard science paradigm shifts.

2. The Transcultural Profiler,

page 24ff, is an architectural metaphor of the anatomy and physiology of the integrated global manager’s space of consciousness in a global management context. The dynamic of consciousness active in the anatomy of the architecture of consciousness of the global manager is derived from neurophysiologic research. More specifically it consists in the assumption of a physiological-psychological analogy in the sense that the twofold structural and functional integration in human neurophysiology is translated psychologically as a hierarchized logic of integration of the intercultural (C3) by the transcultural (C1). It means that, in analogy to neurophysiology, the superordinate structures of consciousness permit the integration of the hierarchically subordinate structures of consciousness. In that sense the transcultural domain (C1) subordinates the intercultural domain (C3) and C1 has therefore and integrative function for C3. This physiologically derived and quantum physically supported dynamic provides the key for the integration of any form of diversity in its underlying unity. Both are concomitant and represent functions of complementary levels of consciousness in general and culture awareness and consciousness in particular. Changing from one level of consciousness to another integrates diversity – a change from C3 to C1 -, or manifests diversity – a change from C1 to C3. Both appear to be actualizable potentialities of culture consciousness and therefore require an awareness of human consciousness and its dynamics or transcultural intelligence. Conscious awareness of complementary inter- and transcultural capabilities of human consciousness and its potential creativity are assumed to trigger a presumed metaphorical quantum effect that tends to codetermine the cultural context in accordance with the status of consciousness evolution of the cultural subject. That holistic understanding of man’s cultural universe with its two complementary aspects of diversity and its dialectics on the one hand and essential unity on the other hand provides a resource and the natural master key for a management of culture that meets the needs of global culture management of our increasingly global multicultural era. (The reiterated principle of an enhanced threefold holistic noetic-psychosomatic structure of man and its neurophysiologically derived axiomatic have been inspired by the late French cardiologist and consciousness researcher Dr. Thérèse Brosse whose publication „La Conscience-Énergie: Structure de l’homme et de l’univers...“, Éditions Présence, Sisteron, France 1984 has been translated into German by the writer of this inquiry.

3. The epistemological foundation of the dynamic of the transcultural dimension:

The transcultural macro-dimension that complements the intercultural macro-dimension of culture can be derived from a 5-P transdisciplinary transcultural approach, i.e. from physics, physiology, philosophy, psychology and metaphysics that converge, as the spokes of a wheel in the hub, in a similar dimension of consciousness, where the peripheral diversities converge in a stable all-encompassing unity, whatever the evolution of the cultural scenarios towards the periphery.

Let me, in line with our scientific-technical age of knowledge, select the metaphorical quantum-cultural reading of culture and its management: A quantum-cultural reading of cultural and intercultural reality suggests that specific data of cultures need to be complemented by the complementary momentum of cultures. It fulfills the metaphorical imperative of the complementarity principle Niels Bohr’s as well as of the insight gained from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. Both together allow us to view culture from two complementary angles and to state about the integration of the two optics: On the one hand there is the specific world of cultures with specific cultural data and coordinates based on empirical intercultural research, while the complementary optic is that of their wave dynamic and momentum. In order to integrate the two and to describe culture and its dynamics holistically, one has to leverage a neurophysiological analogy of twofold structural and functional integration. Not doing so means lagging behind scientific paradigms in the sense that the particle approach to cultures, where each culture is attributed a particular numerical position needs to be complemented by its dynamic momentum. The former tends to be more static, is classificatory and divisive per se, while the latter is dynamic and integrative. Both together constitute the more complete cultural reality that performs better globally in business management and politics alike and therefore needs to be leveraged in our time of increasing globalization challenges.

Quantum physics has not only allowed outer space conquest but it can also enable inner space conquest with the totality of its cultural conditioning. In other words the intercultural aquis (research output), as I shall try to show, needs to be complemented by the transcultural approach, which is a metaphorical application of the microphysics paradigm that has been inaugurated as long as a century ago already. Therefore it is high time to translate this epistemological breakthrough discovery as far as possible to the sociocultural domain as well.

Last but not least and based on an assumed concomitance of the (cultural) observer and the culturally observed, one is led to a form of a metaphorical quantum-cultural effect due to the ability of consciousness to actualize its potentialities and thereby to cocreate a cultural reality in its likeness. The entitiy which has been created in the likeness of the Creator seems to partake in the ability in turn to create a world in its likeness.

4.Model for the management of change of the intercultural paradigm: Defreezing-Changing- Refreezing

Based on the insights into culture gained from three sources, i.e.

- The axiomatic of mind and consciousness
- The axiomatic of natural sciences
- The axiomatic of the human spirit and religion

one may suggest a defreezing of the intercultural paradigm, followed by a subsequent integration of the intercultural in the wider and higher potential transcultural approach to global culture management and a refreezing of the resulting holistic inter-transcultural management approach.

On the sea of life with its as yet unforeseeable cultural waves the compass of comprehensive cultural intelligence is of vital importance. It has the meaning and the function of a solid rock and anchoring. And with the derived quantum cultural formula based on the primacy of consciousness the solution of cultural questions seems to culminate in the nature and structure of the individual and its consciousness as the author of sociocultural conditions and processes.

A synopsis of modern intercultural studies

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Finally, I would like to sum up the totality of intercultural research at a paradigmatic level:

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

(All these authors have undertaken their research many decades after the appearance of the quantum paradigm; Hofstede, THT and Brannen’s and Salk’s cultural assumptions are increasingly characterized by indeterminism.)

3 The transcultural profiler: The universal culture management model

DOME 12 D or 12 Octaves Transcultural Profiler or Transcultural Management Model

& Legend

(following pages)

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

LEGEND OF THE TRANSCULTRAL PROFILER

D1

Cosmics: The Cosmic environment interconnection. The biological and mental roots of life.

D2 Noetics: The highest psychological control, subordination and integration function.

D3

Operationalization: (Potentialization) – Actualization process

D4

Ethics: Altruistic-allocentric, sustainable approach that thinks and acts in terms of each players long-term interests.

D5

Evolution: Phylogenetic development stages 1-6/Intercultural Development stages 7-12

1 sensory level: human developmental stage of perception

2 active level: human developmental stage of action

3 affective level: human developmental stage of affection

4 analytic intellectual level: human developmental stage of the intellect

5 synthetic intellectual level: human developmental stage of the Ego and the social group

6 universal level: human developmental stage that goes beyond Ego and synthesis

7 stage 1 denial: unable to identify cultural differences

8 stage 2 defence: recognition of cultural differences but tendency to evaluate other cultures negatively to one’s own

9 stage 3 minimization: recognition of superficial differences (objective culture) such as customs and habits, while holding the view that all cultures are essentially the same

10 stage 4 acceptance: Recognition and appreciation of cultural differences in behavior and values; considering them as logical and coherent solutions in different contexts.

11 stage 5 adaptation: development of communication skills that facilitate intercultural communication; cybernetic thinking

12 stage 6 integration: internalization of a bicultural or multicultural perspective; intercultural facilitator. (section based on Milton Bennett and Dr. Thérèse Brosse).

D6

ICP The Individual culture profile: Individualization of one's mental software by these variables

1 family

2 religion

3 education

4 language

5 profession

6 class

7 gender

8 race

9 generation

10 neighbours

11 friends

12 region.

D7

NCP National Culture Profile: Acquired through primary, secondary and tertiary socialization

1 Power distance: indicates the extent to which a society accepts the unequal distribution of power in institutions and organization

2 Uncertainty avoidance: refers to a society's discomfort with uncertainty, preferring predictability and stability

3 Individualism/collectivism: reflects the extent to which people prefer to take care of themselves and their immediate families, remaining emotionally independent from groups, organizations and other collectives.

4 Masculinity/femininity: reveals the bias towards either masculine values of assertiveness, competitiveness, and materialism, or towards feminine values of nurturing and the quality of life and relationships

5 Long-term orientation: refers to the extent to which past, present or future oriented attitudes, thought patterns, bahaviours and values are preferred' (Hofstede 5D-model, source: Bartlett, Ghoshal and Birkinshaw, Transnational Management 2003)

6 Universalism-particularism: seeks to discover one's prime allegiance to rules and rule-bound classifications or to the exceptional, unique circumstances and relationships

7 Individualism-communitarianism: measures the extent to which managers see the individual employee and shareholder as paramount, their development, enrichment, and fulfillment; or to what extent the corporation, customers and the wider community should be the beneficiaries of all personal allegiances

8 Specific-diffuse: measures the tendency to analyze, reduce and break down the field of experience or to synthesize, augment, and construct patterns of experience

9 Neutral versus affective: this concern the legitimacy to show emotions while at work

10 Inner-directed - outer-directed: concerns the 'locus of control.' Is it inside each of us, or outside in our environments to which we must adapt?

11 Achieved-ascribed status: refers to whether status is conferred to people on the basis of what they have achieved or because of what they are

12 Sequential-synchronous time: has to do with whether one sees time as passing in a sequence or coming round again and again' (THT 7D-model, source: Trompenaars, Hampden-Turner, Managing People Across Cultures 2005).

D8

Communication styles profile

1 High context-low context: is information in the explicit code or is it implicit in the person?

2 Controlled-free information flow: must be informed versus are already informed

3 Monochronic-polychronic: one thing at a time versus many things at a time

4 Private space-public space: privacy and territoriality versus open space, supportive of networking

5 Concise-elaborate: not talkative versus loquacious

6 Context-centered – person-centered: relevance of speaker and role relations between the parties versus relevance of speaker and the bridging of the communication gap

7 Direct-indirect: cooperativeness. say briefly and clearly what is true, relevant and needed versus indirectness and circumlocutions

8 Affective-neutral: appropriateness versus inappropriateness of expressing emotions in a professional context

9 Abstract-concrete: refers to how concrete one can be in communicating one's ideas?

10 Private-public information space: how healthy is it to give access to personal information in building business contacts?

11 Linear-circular: how linear can you be in conveying your point?

12 Intellectual-relational: the intellectual style can confront ideas but deals with relationships delicately, whereas the relational style deals with relational issues directly, and ideas more indirectly. (Based on Hall and Hall and N. Ewington, TCO London and Univ. of Cambridge).

D9

Corporate Management Profile: further conditions the national and individual culture profile

1 Specialist job: different functional environments condition different perceptions and attitudes

2 Level of hierarchy: attitudes and bahaviours differ on the board compared to the shop floor

3 Training: the professional ethos of an engineer and a business manager differ

4 Orgnizational culture: either Hofstede's UAI-PDI matrix based classification of implicit organization models as tribe/family, pyramid, machine and market: Alternatively THT's classification as Guided Missile, Eiffel Tower, Family and Incubator organizational patterns based on the dimensions equality-hierarchy and person-task

5 Operating field: depending on the availability of resources and supplies companies may be more or less centralized and controlled

6 Scale of operations: big companies tend to be more formalized than smaller ones

7 Institutional environment: In different societies ownership is either personal or by impersonal, shifting shareholders (1-7 are based on Hickson and Pugh, International Management 2001)

8 Leadership style: exploitative autocratic, benevolent autocratic, participative, democratic (Hodgetts and Luthans, International Management) alternatively, situational-contingent leadership: directing, influencing, collaborating, delegating based on the task-relationship orientation matrix (Hersey, Blanchard, Situational Leadership)

9 Management style: factual, intuitive, analytic, and normative

10 Motivation: based on Hofstede's UAI-MAS matrix this typology exists: Achievement of self or group and esteem, achievement and belongingness, security and esteem, and security and belongingness

11 Stages of corporate development: N. Adler's multinational, global, international, transnational stages, alt. Ethnocentric, polycentric, regiocentric and geocentric

12 Cultural distance: CAGE analysis: cultural, administrative, geographic, economic distance.

D10

Intercultural management competencies (3-12 based entirely on International Profiler, WorldWork LTD, London 2001)

1 Altruism: altruistic behaviour as a source of creativity and integration of dilemma

2 Transcultural mindset: holistic perspective of culture and the mind

3 Openness: new thinking, welcoming strangers, acceptance

4 Flexibility: flexible behaviour, flexible judgement, learning languages

5 Personal autonomy: Inner purpose, focus on goals

6 Emotional strength: resilience, coping, spirit of adventure

7 Perceptiveness: attuned, reflected awareness

8 Listening orientation: active listening

9 Transparency: clarity of communication, exposing intentions

10 Cultural knowledge: information gathering, valuing difference

11 Influencing: rapport, range of style, sensitivity to context

12 Synergy: creating new alternatives.

D11

Trust: is the foundation of relationships in general and across cultures in particular, particularly in GBTs (Based on WorldWork Ltd, London and Univ. of Cambridge course materials)

1 Competence: trust based on the perception that team members are competent

2 Compatibility: based on common background, values, approaches, interests and objectives

3 Benevolence: based on the belief that other team members are concerned about one's welfare

4 Integrity: based on keeping promises and a moral behaviour code

5 Predictability: based on consistency over time of team members' behaviour

6 Security: absence of fear

7 Inclusion: partners are team-oriented and integrative

8 Open with information: willingness to share relevant information

9 Accessible: communication at a personal level

10 Reciprocal: mutual trust and cooperation

11 Moral responsibility: assuming responsibility for one's behaviours

12 Good intentions: ethical motivations

D12

Globalism. Planetary environment interconnection diagnostic: global compatibility check.

1 International Law

2 Biodiversity

3 Sustainability

4 Climate change impact

5 International political equilibrium

6 International economic equilibrium

7 International cultural equilibrium

8 Strategic balance

9 Genetic heritage integrity

10 Cultural ethics. Intercultural ethics. Global code of ethics.

11 Environmental compatibility

12 Resources impact

GENERAL EXPLANATION OF THE TRANSCULTURAL PROFILER LEGEND

On the whole the Profiler is a holistic diagnostic, analytical and profiling instrument for working across cultures.

It represents the totality of the field of consciousness of the interconnected inner-outer culture consciousness space of the global player in his management context.

Due to the interconnected continuum of the field of culture consciousness the inner stance of the culture observing consciousness can contribute to shaping outer culture. Culture management tends to become consciousness management. Vertically the following levels of consciousness are present in the structure of the Profiler which functionally integrates it hierarchically:

1 The superquantic consciousness level which presides over the quantic consciousness level

2 The quantic consciousness level which presides over the

2a transcultural consciousness and the

2b intercultural consciousness

3 physical culture consciousnesses

The totality of the profiler structure is subordinated and integrated by the top three dimensions. The quantum cultural effect allows to adopt the integrative transcultural or an intercultural stance alternatively or a combination of both. Quantum cultural consciousness is integrated by superquantic (culture) consciousness.

The entire edifice can be viewed metaphorically, in quantum cultural terms, as waves or as particles: The wave concept is supported by the fact that the profiler consists of twelve octaves which in turn translate as value preferences along with associated behavioural patterns. The more registers a cultural player can "instrumentalize" (the twelve octaves cover the totality of the human culture and consciousness "music") the better his cultural performance will be, the ability to resonate and to enable resonance. The complementary particle concept also allows a reading as cultural particulars of players. That is what traditional aggregate models of cultures provide.

The twelve times twelve dimensional edifice suggest completeness², the space-time of culture consciousness grounded in the HIC et NUNC. The vertical axis is an evolution-involution cybernetic circuit towards higher forms of culture

consciousness and managerial cultural effectiveness. As one evolves within and towards the higher dimensions one can increasingly manifest the higher dimensional potentialities.

The cosmic, noetic and the various cultural levels of the profiler form a hierarchy based on the neurophysiologic analogical principle of anatomic integration and functional subordination, according to which superior neurophysiologic structures subordinate and integrate lowers into a hierarchical unity. It is a logic of control and integration. Therefore it is necessary to identify the superordinate level that can govern the subordinate; culturally speaking, a cultural metalevel which can not only control specific cultural characteristics but one that can govern the entire mental cultural repository with the sum total of its conditioning. The Western dualistic psychosomatic assumption of man’s constitution does not provide – except for the neurophysiologic analogy and the Christian tradition – the third governing level of the holistic threefold noetic-psychosomatic hierarchical structure of man which can be distilled across time, space and cultures and which has the potential to integrate the totality of the psychological architecture. The third level of the constitutional hierarchy of man could therefore be considered as a third millennium key to the management of culture. It is completely free and can set man free.

The DOME TRANSCULTURAL MANAGEMENT MODEL or PROFILER is a metaphorical visualization of the hierarchically integrated global managerial psychological architecture in a transcultural management context.

[...]