首页> 外文期刊>Benchmarking >Role of culture-specific rights,responsibilities and duties in industry 4.0: comparing Indic and Western perspectives
【24h】

Role of culture-specific rights,responsibilities and duties in industry 4.0: comparing Indic and Western perspectives

机译:行业的文化特定权利,责任和职责的作用4.0:比较申报和西方观点

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose - The increasing globalization of business has led to increasing demand for executives who can function in cultural milieus different from their own. This demand has been exacerbated by the fact that globalization has not led to cultural homogenization and hence, for good or bad, executives are not able to universally apply the home country's conceptualizations of rights, responsibilities and duties and must operate within the constraints of host country's cultural environments. Hence, business scholars and global executives increasingly need to reflect on the conceptualization of rights, responsibilities and duties; understand the historical context which has led to different conceptualizations across geographies and appreciate and harness these differences for improving business effectiveness. This paper helps in this endeavor by explaining the differences and similarities that exists between the Indian and Western cultures regarding the concepts of roles,responsibilities and duties. This exposition will help multinational organizations improve their internal practices and employee training methods.Design/methodology/approach - This study attempts to trace the differences and similarities in the conceptualization of rights, duties and responsibilities between the Western tradition and the Indic tradition by literature review. The Indic tradition refers to the broad cultural paradigm that shapes the thinking of the people of Indian subcontinent. The prominent sources of the Indic tradition include Hinduism and Buddhism.India was a British colony for two hundred years and is home to one of world's largest English-speaking population. There are more Muslims in the Indian subcontinent than in the Middle East (Grim and Karim, 2011).Hence, the Indic tradition has also been substantially influenced by the Western and Islamic traditions. Findings - The paper argues that Westerners and Indians have different conceptualization of rights, duties and responsibilities and their relative importance. Broadly speaking, Indian ethos focuses on context-specific responsibilities while the Western attitude focuses on universal rights. These differing conceptualizations have been shaped by the cultural history of the two regions and are manifested in the decision-making styles, levels of individual autonomy and views on the ethicality of actions. There is a need to train expatriate Western and Indian managers on these issues to enable smooth functioning.Research limitations/implications - The cross-cultural literature has tended to lump together all non-Western civilizations under the category of East thereby ignoring significant differences between them. The Far-East countries of China, Korea, Taiwan and Japan have been highly influenced by the Confucian ethics.India-specific social systems like the caste system, division of human life span into stages with specific responsibilities, enduring worship of nature and Western influence through colonization have been absent in these countries or much less marked. The paper aims to bring forward the distinguishing features in Indian thought that contributes to its distinctive attitude toward rights, responsibilities and duties; contrast it with the Western views on rights and duties and identify the relevance of the discussion to the business context.Practical implications - The cross-cultural training needs to emphasize both conflict resolution and behavioral aspects. For example, the conflict resolution process in Western countries can be more algorithmic with conflicts being rationally determined by consistent application as well-defined rules (as nature of duties is more universal in Western tradition). On the other hand, conflict resolution practices in India need to be contextual and may require appeals to higher ideals (as nature of duties is more contextual and idealistic in Eastern tradition).Social implications - The differences in attitudes regarding rights, responsibility and duties between the West and India suggest the need for cross-cultural training of managers and contextual conflict resolution techniques. The need is exacerbated by the increase in the number of multinational corporations (MNCs).Earlier, most MNCs were headquartered in the West and hence cross-cultural training was primarily geared to help Western expatriates fit into the host country culture (Nam et al., 2014). The growth of Asian MNCs has increased the need of cross-cultural training for Asian expatriates (Nam et al, 2014).Originality/value - The training processes can be customized to supplement cultural strengths and promote behaviors that are culturally inhibited. Employees in India can be trained to emphasize the value of assertiveness in communication, the need to articulate one's personal success and appreciate the rigid nature of rules in Western contexts. Similarly, Westerners can be trained to emphasize the importance of context in business interactions, the need to forge perso
机译:目的 - 企业的越来越大的全球化导致对能够在文化利义中运作的高管的需求越来越多。全球化没有导致文化均质化的事实,这种需求加剧了,因此对于好的或坏,高管无法普遍地应用祖国的权利,责任和职责的概念化,并且必须在东道国的限制范围内运作文化环境。因此,商业学者和全球高管越来越需要反思权利,责任和职责的概念化;了解在地理位置的不同概念化的历史背景下,欣赏和利用这些差异以提高业务效果。本文通过解释印度和西方文化之间存在关于角色,责任和职责的概念之间存在的差异和相似性,有助于这一努力。这一博览会将有助于跨国组织改善其内部做法和员工培训方法.Design/Methodology/Approach - 本研究试图通过文学审查追查西方传统与宪法传统之间的权利,职责和责任的概念化,职责和责任的差异和相似之处。该标准的传统是指塑造印度次大陆人民思想的广泛文化范式。杰出传统的杰出来源包括印度教和佛教。印第安人是英国殖民地,持续了两百年,是世界上最大的英语人口之一的所在地。印度次大陆有更多的穆斯林,而不是中东(Grim和Karim,2011)。当时,该标准传统也受到西方和伊斯兰传统的影响。调查结果 - 论文认为,西方人和印度人对权利,职责和责任的不同概念化以及相对重要性。广泛的说法,印度民主侧重于特定于背景的职责,而西方态度侧重于普遍权利。这些不同的概念化是由两个地区的文化史而塑造,并且在决策风格中表现出来,个人自主权水平和对行动的道德性的看法。有必要在这些问题上培训外籍西方和印度管理者,以实现顺利的运作。研究限制/影响 - 跨文化文学们倾向于将所有非西方文明的所有非西方文明在东方的范围内倾向于忽视它们之间的显着差异。中国的远东国家,韩国,台湾和日本受到儒家伦理的影响。印第安纳特定的社会制度,如种姓,人类生命划分为具有具体职责的阶段,持久崇拜自然和西方影响通过殖民化已经在这些国家缺席或更少标记。本文旨在提出印度思想中的显着特征,这有助于其对权利,责任和义务的独特态度;将其与西方对权利和职责的意见形成鲜明对比,并确定讨论对业务背景的相关性。正文的影响 - 跨文化培训需要强调解决冲突和行为方面。例如,西方国家的冲突解决进程可以通过一致申请作为明确的规则(因为职责在西方传统中更为普遍)的情况下,利用合理的申请进行了更多的算法。另一方面,印度的冲突解决实践需要上下文,可能需要上诉到更高的理想(因为职责的性质是东部传统的更加语境和理想主义)。社会影响 - 关于权利,责任和职责之间的态度差异西部和印度建议需要对经理的跨文化培训和背景冲突解决技术。通过跨国公司(MNCs)的数量增加,大多数跨国公司的需求加剧了,大多数跨国公司总部位于西部,因此跨文化培训主要是为了帮助西方外籍人士融入东道国文化(Nam等人。 ,2014)。亚洲跨国公司的增长增加了亚洲外籍人士跨文化培训的需求(Nam等,2014).originality / Value - 培训过程可以定制,以补充文化强度,促进文化抑制的行为。印度的员工可以接受培训,以强调沟通中的自信的价值,需要阐明一个人的个人成功,并欣赏西方背景下的规则的僵化性质。同样,西方人可以接受培训,以强调背景在商业互动中的重要性,需要伪造波利文

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号