Cultural Diversity in Software Project Management Web viewproject management today. In the...

Cultural Diversity in Software Project Management

II. Background of the Study

In the last two decades, more and more organizations have been and are engaging in projects related to IT at different stages of their infrastructure, the actual conditions are taking them to partner and interact with domestic and international organizations increasing technical and organizational complexity. Unfortunately, past experiences showed, in general, that IT projects are high risk undertakings and the IT industry still struggles to improve their efficiency rate when it comes to successful projects. Under these circumstances, the convergence of telecommunications and information technology propose an unlimited but also threatening environment, as possibilities expand so do the chances of repeating the IT project failure phenomenon.

History of Project Management

Project management has been practiced for thousands of years since the Egyptian era, however, it has been about half a century ago that organizations start applying systematic project management tools and techniques to complex projects. In the 1950s, Navy employed modern project management methodologies in their Polaris project. During the 1960s and 1970s, Department of Defense, NASA, and large engineering and construction companies utilized project management principles and tools to manage large budget, schedule-driven projects. In the 1980s, manufacturing and software development sectors started to adopt and implement sophisticated project management practices. By the 1990s, the project management theories, tools, and techniques were widely received by different industries and organizations.

Four Periods of Project Management

Snyder and Kline (1987) noted that the modern project management era started in 1958 with the development of CPM/PERT. Morris (1987) argues that the origin of project management comes from the chemical industry just prior to World War II. Morris (1987) further notes that the project management is clearly defined as a separate discipline in the Atlas missile program, especially in the Polaris project. Some literatures pointed the origin of project management to Henri Fayol’s (1916) five functions of a manager: (1) to plan, (2) to organize, (3) to coordinate, (4) to control, and (5) to direct or command. Kerzner (1998) observes that project management is an “outgrowth of systems management.” Four periods have been identified to better

Project Management PUPQC- 3


capture the history of modern project management: (1) prior to 1958, (2) 1958 – 1979, (3) 1980 – 1994, and (4) 1995 to present.

The origin of the modern project management concept started between 1900s and 1950s. During this time, technology advancement shortened the project schedule. Automobiles allowed effective resource allocation and mobility. Telecommunication system increased the speed of communication. The job specification was widely used and Henry Gantt invented Gantt chart. The job specification later became the basis of developing the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS).

During the 1980s and early 1990s, the revolution of IT/IS sector shifted people from using mainframe computer to multitasking personal computer that had high efficiency in managing and controlling complex project schedules. In the mid 80s, the Internet served researchers and developers, and local area networks and Ethernet technology started to dominate network technology (Leiner et al 2000).

During the 1950s through 1970s, most computer engineers were responsible for operating the project management systems because the mainframe systems were not easy to use. Morris (1985) acknowledged the unfriendliness of the mainframe software. During the late 1970s and early 1980s, project management software for PC became widely available by a number of companies in the mid-1980s which made project management techniques more easily accessible.

Recent History

Two figures of the early twentieth century stand out as the fathers of project management as we know it today. The first was the American engineer Henry Gantt, who in 1910 helped to revolutionize management when he created the Gantt chart, which establishes a schedule for a project and records how work is progressing according to that schedule. Gantt charts are still used in project management today.

The second was Henri Fayol, a French mining engineer whose work in directing one of France’s most important mining operations led him to create a complete theory of project management known as “Fayolism.” Fayol identified the core functions and principles of management. Like Gantt’s charts, Fayolism is still considered relevant to



project management today.

In the post-World War II era, project management continued to grow, based on the foundation laid by pioneers such as Gantt and Fayol. The founding of organizations such as the International Project Management Association and the Project Management Institute demonstrated that project management had come into its own as a field of expertise in its own right.

Today, project management continues to evolve. With the advent of computers, a powerful new tool for planning, directing, and coordinating complex projects became available, and soon many different kinds of project management software appeared. Such software comes with various features to help users accomplish projects in a more efficient way than ever.

Project

A project is defined as “a project is a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service, or result.”(Project Management Institute, 2008). A large percentage of the World’s Gross National Product is used on projects, including design and construction of infrastructure, production and telecommunications facilities, software development, pharmaceutical research and development, defense systems, and many other type of projects. Project Management makes an important involvement to value creation globally (Anbari, Bredillet, and Turner, 2008).

A project is also defined as “a unique venture with a beginning and an end, undertaken by people to meet established goals with defined constraints of time, resources, and quality.” As stated above, a project has a beginning and an end. Therefore any repetitive activity is not a project. Some shared attributes of projects are: goals, people, equipment and supplies, schedules, budgets, conflicts, and interdependencies between other business projects and strategies. Some unique attributes of projects include: projects are never identical in implementation, have varying end results, have different personalities, and have problems that are unpredictable.



Teams and Projects

A team can be defined as a group of people organized to work together to achieve a goal. Teams can be collocated, meaning they are in the same physical location and team members have the opportunity for face-to-face interactions on a regular basis. For the purposes of this paper, a team that is collocated is considered a traditional form of a team.

Teams can also be dispersed or virtual, meaning that the team members are located in disparate geographic locations. There can also be varying degrees to a team’s collocation and dispersion. For example, a majority of a team’s members can be collocated in an office with a few of the team members located in other geographic areas. It is possible to have a project team that consists of groups of collocated members who are part of a larger virtual project team. However, this paper will focus on the two extremes, the traditional collocated project team and the geographically dispersed virtual project team with a majority of the team members separated by distance and/or time.

Cultural Perspectives on the Project Management of Infrastructure Schemes in Developing CountriesU. Isah, R. Kirkham and D. Ling

International Project

International projects involve international participation by the international

multilateral, governmental or nongovernmental organisations through financing and

technical assistance (Baranskaya, 2007). This characteristic makes them unique and

therefore requires a different planning and implementation than national projects. There

are obvious differences such as communication, wage rates, level of productivity,

statutory duties, legal systems, and taxes. In addition, there are other differences such

as local codes and practices, weather and climate conditions, availability and quality of

materials and equipment, social systems, local cultural norms and values, which often

get overlooked due to lack of cultural understanding or detailed project planning.



The recipient countries lack the technical and management skills required to

successfully implement and manage project. As a result, many of the financial

institutions require them to seek foreign expertise to assist with project preparation and

implementation. The foreign expertise may not be familiar with resources, the socio-

cultural background, and are accustomed to different approaches to engineering and

project management practices. This induces conflict of interests, extra pressures on

executives, and frustration, which restrains or obstructs project progress and often lead

to lost opportunities, directing of development efforts at wrong groups, project cost

overrun and schedule delays.

Intended beneficiaries can reject the project if there is a cultural misfit of the

project objectives and a lack of local knowledge and understanding. In order for these

projects to be successfully implemented and managed, the project manager must take

cultural factors of traditional values, customs, and beliefs into consideration at the

project planning stage itself, so that, project objectives are consistent with the values

and customs of the beneficiaries. Before we go further, it is important to describe and

understand the term “culture‟.

Understanding Culture

It is obvious that people across nations and culture behave and believe

differently. Hofstede presents the following four dimensions to differentiate national

cultures:

Power distance

Uncertainty avoidance

Individualism

Masculinity

First, nations and cultures differ in terms of how they define specific phenomena.

Phenomena include behavior, language and institutions. These kinds of differences are

known as nominal differences, for instance language. Cultures with completely different



linguistics origins describe their phenomena differently. As a result, managing change in

another culture, involves understanding of how objects or events are defined in other

cultures. Such differences may not be reflected simply in phonetics and grammar. More

importantly, a single construct may have entirely different connotations across cultures.

For instance, organizational commitment in the United States of America has been

defined as one’s willingness to stay with an organization (i.e. continuance), identical

with organizational goals and values, and willingness to exert effort on behalf of the

organization. However, the same term, has no direct Chinese translation. For those

Chinese who are committed to their organizations, particularly those who have

traditional Chinese values, probably familial or supervisor-subordinate-relationships are

more characteristics of the commitment than the similarity in values and objectives

between the organization and the employee.

Nominal linguistics can also occur in cultures with identical or similar linguistics

origins. For instance, the British or those similar to the British culture will discover that,

when they ask for biscuits in America, people will bring them a scone or a piece of dried

bun. When they ask for milk for their coffee, the waiter or waitress may either give them

a bewildered stare, or correct their order by giving them cream.

Is Culture really a problem?

Culture is not a problem – unless it is a problem…. (Vonsild, 1996)

Gomez made an observation and state that, many international projects have

obviously been executed without anyone ever noticing that cultural differences may

have caused unanticipated frustrations or hurdles. This should not be belittled.

However, further stated again that, quite a number of projects never reach optimal

levels of operation, successful turnover to the local authorities or indeed customer

satisfaction because cultural differences have increase other issues that may have been

encountered.



One company which presented a case story in one of the “Management of

Multicultural Projects” programs described a project in North Africa which involved

interested parties from 3 continents – Korea, Libya, the UK and Denmark. For the

experienced Danish company alone, the project was to be finished within 2 years with a

profit of 2 million US dollars. After 6 years the project was finally completed, but at a

loss of 1 million US dollars. Even the startup meeting, which was to have been the

energetic start of the project attended by all the key interested parties, turned out to be

a preview of the problems that were yet to come.

The parties were never present the start-up week all at the same time. It was

nearly impossible to draw up project plans and agreements to everyone’s satisfaction.

Organizational relationships were never quite clear. Language and cultural differences

made communication difficult.

Preparing for their presentation at the “Management of Multicultural Projects”

program, the Danish company realized with the wisdom of hindsight that many of the

problems through-out the project, even after the start-up phase, could have been

foreseen and at least partially resolved, if there had been a careful cultural analysis of

the interested parties at the start.

Cultural Impact

The cultural impact induced by each team member in a project is more often than

not unconscious. Part of our culture may be conscious and understandable to others.

We know and can convey what is regarded to be a polite behavior or polite language.

However, few of us are completely aware of how our actions – and ways of thinking –

are uttered by more hidden or in fact unconscious values. For instance, patterns of

interpersonal relationships, attitudes towards authority, approaches to carrying out a

task, concern for efficiency, communication patterns, work and learning styles.



Cultural norms and values are heritage. Oudenhoven & De Boer, state that no

one culture is wrong, and another right, but there is a shared view of what is considered

right or wrong, logical and illogical, normal and abnormal, fair and unfair, within each

cultural grouping, whether national, ethnic or organizational. He further states that these

norms influence the way people communicate and behave and the organizational

structures created by them. Applied to projects, there will be little perception of cultural

differences, when project team members come from the same or similar cultural

backgrounds. For instance, a product development project undertaken within one

company or a construction project involving companies within the same local region.

Whereas, in a situation, where the project team members are from different

background, they tend to bring different norm expectations to the project – this is usually

an unconscious process. As a result, cultural clashes tend to disturb the smooth

operation of the project. Cultural clashes simmer often just underneath the surface. “We

know something is wrong, but we can‟t put our finger on it”.

International Project Management

One of the key conclusions emanating from qualitative research is that distinct challenges result from international projects compared to domestic projects. While these challenges need to be addressed explicitly, traditional PM methodology is not obsolete. On the contrary, interview results showed that a methodological approach to international PM is mandatory for project success.

However, focus in international projects shifts towards Communication Management, Risk Management, Quality Management and Scope Management. In context of quality and scope, the most important aspects regarding a traditional methodological PM approach are a realistic project plan, clearly defined roles and responsibilities as well as an appropriate and jointly agreed specification of deliverables. In that context, the Organizational Framework in which the project is conducted and the contractual agreements between the different countries’ organizations is important for obtaining a common understanding of the respective project roles and responsibilities.



Comparing domestic and international projects, focus on PM disciplines shifts towards effective risk management in international projects. Specific risks resulting from an international environment mainly deal with miscommunication and the transfer of knowledge across the team which is especially important in case of high attrition rates. Therefore, Organizational Systems and Processes need to be in place to flexibly transfer knowledge, skills and resources from one country to another. This is especially valid for fluctuating resources that need to adapt to a changing environment and adopt project knowledge very quickly.

Being the most important area for domestic projects already, communication gains even more relevance in an international project context. Research shows that an effective communications plan and a common understanding of project objectives are critical issues and, at the same time, difficult challenges. All these issues are related to a sound traditional PM methodology and the organizational environment of a project. While these aspects are still important in context of international projects, fieldwork results indicate that there are even more important issues that refer to more intangible features of communication rooted in cultural differences. The differences in behaviors and attitudes, mentalities and personalities as well as different interpretations need to be managed appropriately for project success.

Culture

The word culture comes from the Latin word colere which means to dwell in or to cultivate. It can be defined as:“... is the collective programming (thinking, feeling and acting) of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another.” (Hofstede, 2008).

Culture is characterized by a set of unique values that guides the behavior of people belonging to that culture. Hofstede proposes four cultural dimensions: individualism-collectivism, masculinity-femininity, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance. The major assertion of Hofstede’s framework is that there are shared values, beliefs, and norms that are culture specific and these factors can predict a wide range of human behavior and practices. These four cultural dimensions have been the bases for numerous empirical studies in a variety of disciplines. Several studies have lent support to the validity of these cultural dimensions. A growing number of IS studies



have used these cultural dimensions to account for results observed.

Although all four cultural dimensions may be useful for predicting human behavior and practices, Hofstede argues that uncertainty avoidance and power distance tend to be especially relevant for research pertaining to organizational behavior and practices. This is because uncertainty avoidance and power distance jointly determine key aspects of corporate behavior such as distribution of decision authority, establishment of rules and methods, and management of risks and ambiguity. Studies conducted at the organizational level have made use of these two cultural dimensions to account for empirical results. Hofstede also suggests that individualism collectivism and masculinity-femininity may be more relevant for research on individual behavior and practices. Empirical studies have successfully used individualism collectivism and masculinity-femininity to predict human behavior at the individual level. Given that the unit of analysis in this study was the individual IS developer, individualism-collectivism and masculinity-femininity were used as a basis to build the theoretical model.

Among the various cultural dimensions, individualism-collectivism has been found to be the most stable. Individualism and collectivism are conceived as two extremes of a bipolar continuum. An individualistic culture is one where ties between people are loose so that they base their self-understanding on their own actions, which are usually taken independently of what others think. People are frank and candid. When making decisions, personal views prevail over collective concerns. A collectivistic culture is one where people are integrated into strong cohesive groups so that they base their self-understanding on the reactions of others around them. When making decisions, collective concerns prevail over personal views. Although differences exist among people within each country, people in Singapore tend to lean towards collectivism while people in the United States tend to lean towards individualism.

Masculinity and femininity are also conceived as two ends of a bipolar continuum. A masculine culture is one where people are tasks oriented. People value earning power and career advancement, and emphasize efficiency. When making decisions, performance prevails over welfare. A feminine culture is one where people are relationship oriented. People focus on interpersonal issues and quality of life, and emphasize service. When making decisions, welfare prevails over performance. Although differences exist among people within each country, people in Singapore tend to lean slightly towards femininity while people in the United States tend to lean slightly



towards masculinity.

Diversity

In the context of managing employees and serving customers, the term ‘diversity’ means all of the significant differences between people, including perceptions of differences, that need to be considered in particular situations and circumstances. Often the most significant differences are the least obvious, such as our thinking styles or beliefs and values. There are multiple dimensions of diversity which may be more or less significant in different business functions and relationships:

Gender Age Culture Ethnicity Regional culture Sexual orientation Mental and physical abilities Education Religion Language Literacy Work experience Functional role and status

Economic status Family status Career roles Geographic location Work style Communication style Learning style Thinking style Management style Personality Ideology Profession Industry Organizational culture

Cultural diversity and Cultural Diversity Management

Diversity describes “a variety of qualities, or rather everything in which people are

different from or similar to each other”. Diversity or variety here means a range of

features to describe people, e.g. age, gender, sexual orientation, origin, religious

denomination, social class etc. Cultural diversity singularizes the feature culture, be it

with respect to nation, region, ethnic group or religion, as well. Corporate, industry and

professional cultures also come under this heading.



Diversity management has been developed as a hands-on concept to deal with

diversity in all its aspects. Diversity management is aimed at increasing staff’s

motivation and creativity through taking advantage of their various backgrounds and at

supporting corporate strategy. Cultural diversity management focuses on how to deal

with cultural heterogeneity, which is particularly important for companies in the process

of globalization.

Diversity is characterized by a wide range of qualities: on the one hand, it

contributes a considerable number of valuable skills and acquirements, for instance

creativity and innovation as well as precisely matching customer orientation. On the

other hand, differences, in particular cultural differences, may lead to

misunderstandings and friction loss. One aspect of diversity management is therefore

the prevention of conflicts, or, respectively, finding constructive solutions; efforts must

not be stopped here, though, as otherwise a vast potential would be left untapped –

diversity is to be seen as a resource which has to be activated strategically in the

operations of the company.

A look at the corporate landscape reveals a vast number of diverging attitudes to

cultural diversity and cultural diversity management – which may perfectly well differ

from the concept just outlined above – depending on location, industry, size, history or

international positioning of the company. A connotation observed particularly often is the

emphasis on conflicts, which makes diversity management appear in a rather

unpleasant light, as something only necessary in companies and countries stricken by

ethnic or other conflicts. The present survey therefore intends to draw attention to the

special conditions in any given situation by means of a country comparison. In addition

it will focus on the position taken by German companies in particular. The survey is also

aimed at pointing out the contradictions between intention and reality, a dichotomy

characterizing the actual application of diversity management.



Managing Cross-Cultural Differences in ProjectsFrank T. Anbari, E.V. Khilkhanova, Maria V. Romanova, Mateo Ruggia, Han-huei Tsay

Managers in today’s multicultural global business community frequently encounter cultural differences, which can interfere with the successful completion of projects. This paper describes the most well-known and accepted theories of cultural differences and illustrates them with examples from international project management. Two leading studies of cross-cultural management have been conducted by Geert Hofstede and Fons Trompenaars. Both approaches propose a set of cultural dimensions along which dominant value systems can be ordered. These value systems affect human thinking, feeling, and acting, and the behavior of organizations and institutions in predictable ways. The two sets of dimensions reflect basic problems that any society has to cope with but for which solutions differ. They are similar in some respects and different in others. The dimensions can be grouped into several categories:

Relations between people. Two main cultural differences have been identified. Hofstede distinguishes between individualism and collectivism. Trompenaars breaks down this distinction into two dimensions: universalism versus particularism and individualism versus communitarianism.

Motivational orientation. Societies choose ways to cope with the inherent uncertainty of living. In this category Hofstede identifies three dimensions : masculinity versus femininity, amount of uncertainty avoidance, and power distance.

Attitudes toward time. Hofstede distinguishes between a long-term versus a short-term orientation. Trompenaars identifies two dimensions: sequential versus synchronic and inner versus outer time.

Two additional categories called socio-cultural dimensions were proposed by

Aycan et. al.:paternalism and fatalism. In a paternalistic relationship, the role of the superior is to provide guidance, protection, nurturing and care to the subordinate, and the role of the subordinate, in return, is to be loyal and deferential to the superior. Fatalism is the belief that it is not possible to fully control the outcomes of one’s actions and, therefore, trying too hard to achieve something and making long-term plans are not worthwhile exercises.



In what follows provide a brief description of the most relevant dimensions and consider some cultural problems that might arise when managing an international project.

Power distance is the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. The basic problem involved is the degree of human inequality that underlies the functioning of each particular society. In Hofstede’s research, power distance is measured in a Power Distance Index (PDI). The values and attitudes found at the national level contrast “low-PDI countries” with “high-PDI countries”, with some countries placed in between. High PDI countries include Malaysia and Mexico. Low PDI countries include Austria and Denmark.

Uncertainty avoidance refers to the extent to which a culture programs its members to feel either uncomfortable or comfortable in unstructured situations. Unstructured situations are novel, unknown, surprising, and different from usual. The basic problem involved is the degree to which a society tries to control the uncontrollable. The countries from Hofstede’s study were each given a score on Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI). UAI was derived from country mean scores on questions dealing with rule orientation, employment stability, and stress. Hofstede’s research has found UAI values for 50 countries and three regions. The countries rank from Greece, Portugal, and Guatemala (highest UAI) to Singapore, Jamaica, and Denmark (lowest UAI).

Individualism, versus its opposite, collectivism, is the degree to which individuals are supposed to look after themselves or remain integrated into groups, usually around the family. Positioning itself between these poles is a very basic problem all societies face. A concise definition is: “Individualism stands for a society in which the ties between individuals are loose: Everyone is expected to look after him/herself and her/his immediate family only. Collectivism stands for a society in which people from birth onward are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, which throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty”. National differences in Individualism are calculated in an Individualism Index (IDV). The highest IDV scores were found in the United States, Australia, and Great Britain. The lowest IDV scores were found in Guatemala, Ecuador, and Panama.



Masculinity versus its opposite, femininity, refers to the distribution of emotional roles between the genders, which is another fundamental problem for any society. This distinction opposes “tough” masculine and “tender” feminine societies. The duality of the sexes is a fundamental fact with which different societies cope in different ways. Surveys on the importance of work goals show that almost universally women attach more importance to social goals such as relationships, helping others, and the physical environment, and men attach more importance to ego goals such as careers and money. However, Hofstede’s data revealed that the importance respondents attached to such “feminine” versus “masculine” work varied across countries as well as across occupations. Masculinity stands for a society in which gender roles are clearly distinct. Men are supposed to be assertive, tough, and focused on material success. Women are supposed to be more modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life. Femininity stands for a society in which gender roles overlap. Both men and women are supposed to be modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life. Because the respondents were mostly men, Hofstede suggested calling this dimension the Masculinity Index (MAS). The list of countries in order of MAS (high gender roles distinction at work) shows Japan at the top. German-speaking countries (Austria, Switzerland, and Germany) scored high; so did the Caribbean Latin American countries Venezuela, Mexico, and Colombia, and Italy. The Anglo countries (Ireland, Great Britain, South Africa, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada) all scored above average. Asian countries, other than Japan, were in the middle. The feminine side (low gender roles distinction at work) includes other Latin countries (France, Spain, Salvador, etc.). At the extreme “feminine” pole were the Nordic countries including Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands. Low MAS countries are characterized by cooperation at work and a good relationship with the boss, belief in group decisions, promotion by merit, lower job stress, and preference for smaller companies. High MAS countries are characterized by challenge and recognition in jobs, belief in individual decisions, higher job stress, and preference for large corporations.

Long-term versus short-term orientation refers to the extent to which a culture programs its members to accept delayed gratification of their material, social, and emotional needs. Hofstede’s research shows country scores on a Long-term Orientation Index (LTO) for 23 countries. East Asian countries (China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea) scored highest. Western countries were on the low side, and some developing countries (Zimbabwe, Philippines, Nigeria, and Pakistan) scored lowest. So this dimension does not oppose East and West; it divides the world along new lines.



Business people in long-term oriented cultures are accustomed to working toward building strong positions in their markets and do not expect immediate results. Managers (often family members) are allowed time and resources to make their own contributions. In short-term oriented cultures the “bottom line” (the results of the past month, quarter, or year) is a major concern; control systems are focused on it and managers are constantly judged by it. This state of affairs is supported by arguments that are assumed to be rational, but the cultural distinction reminds us of the fact that this entire rationality rests on cultural – that is, pre-rational – choices.

Hofstede’s research, which used questionnaires provided to the worldwide employees of IBM, did not include some regions, and countries of Central and Eastern Europe. However, Hofstede hypothesized that Russian managers would be characterized by high power distance, high uncertainty avoidance, medium-range individualism, and low masculinity (low gender roles distinction at work). Bollinger tested Hofstede’s hypothesis in its studies of Russian managers in 1994, and found support for these predictions. More recent studies utilized Hofstede’s dimensional model as a paradigm for new countries. For instance, Elenkov in his comparative study found that US managers are more individualistic than their Russian counterparts and the managerial culture in the United States is also characterized by lower power distance and uncertainty avoidance than the Russian managerial culture [6]. Regarding paternalism and fatalism, Aycan et al. found Russian managers to have high scores on both of these dimensions.

Review of the IS off shoring Literature: The Role of Cross-Cultural Differences and Management Practices

Gregory, Robert Wayne

The Concept of Culture and its Analysis in IS Offshore Outsourcing

One of the most frequently mentioned drivers of so-called ”hidden costs“ in IS

offshore outsourcing are cultural differences between client and vendor (Ang et al.

2008, Dibbern, et al. 2008, Levina et al. 2008, Nicholson, et al. 2001). But what is

”culture“? The concept of culture has been used to name many things, including

religious beliefs, rituals, knowledge, moral values, the arts, rhetorical genres, and more.



Because of its complexity and the difficulty to understand culture as a whole, it has been

proposed to break up culture into its constituent parts and based on this analysis move

forward with the notion of a particulate theory of culture. On these grounds, culture can

be conceptualized to have subjective and objective components. Subjective culture is

defined as “an individual’s characteristic way of perceiving the man-made part of one’s

environment and involves the perception of rules, norms, roles, and values”. Objective

culture, on the other hand, focuses on the legal, economic, political, religious, and

educational systems (Leung et al. 2008). Concerning subjective culture, researchers

have found that it plays a role at different levels, including societal, national,

organizational, professional, group, and even individual identity level. But research on

cultural issues in IS has focused primarily on cultural dimensions or variables at the

national level of analysis. There have also been attempts to take these cultural

dimensions as a basis but measure them at the individual level of analysis. However,

these and other studies build upon the research conducted by Hofstede, subsequently

used and extended by other researchers. Despite their popularity and widespread use

in empirical IS research, these classifications and generalizations have been criticized

for their oversimplification of the complexities involved in culture. Accordingly, these

conceptualizations of culture are useful for capturing central tendencies and cultural

differences at an abstract level. However, they do not take into account within-culture

variations, do not acknowledge the dynamic nature of culture, and do not focus on the

individual level of analysis. Therefore, more recently IS researchers have taken new

approaches to analyze cultural differences (e.g., Gregory et al. 2009).

Cross Cultural CommunicationProsser, Michael H.

Cross-cultural communication is normally thought of as communication that takes

place between members of whole cultures in contact or between their cultural

spokespersons or representatives. Cross-cultural communication is distinguished from

intra-cultural communication, which occurs between people sharing a common culture,

and intercultural communication, which refers to exchanges in interpersonal settings

between individuals from different cultures. William B. Gudykunst identifies both



intercultural communication and cross cultural communication as segments of

intergroup communication.

When researchers want to compare or contrast the communication of people

from different cultures and explain how communication varies from one culture to

another, then a cross-cultural communication study occurs. William B. Gudykunst and

Carmen M. Lee identify this type of research as among the several approaches for

incorporating culture into communication theories. Such theorizing must link dimensions

of cultural variability directly with the cultural norms and rules that influence the

communication behavior being explained. It must avoid oversimplifying the process or

inappropriately coupling the way that the cultural variables influence cultural norms and

rules or the reverse. This kind of work is of interest to several academic fields, including

anthropology, communication, international relations, psychology, and sociology, and

has been applied to concepts such as attitudes, beliefs, cognition, cross-cultural

business and training, journalism, language and linguistics, mass media, nonverbal

cues, organizational culture, perceptions, stereotypes, thought-patterning, and values.

Theoretical Dimensions

Several sources of cultural variation have been investigated. These include (a)

power distance, or the degree to which cultures include status and power hierarchies

versus relative equality; (b) individualism-collectivism, or the extent to which cultures

value individual personal identity versus community identity; (c) self-construals, or the

ways that people see themselves; and (d) low and high context, or the degree to which

a culture relies on unstated relational dynamics versus direct verbal communication.

A number of important theories have made use of these cross-cultural distinctions.

Examples include Stella Ting-Toomey's 1985 face negotiation theory, which illustrates

how communicators from different cultures manage varying practices of facework;

Young Yun Kim's 1993 conversational constraints theory, which looks at how people

from different cultures choose various strategies of communication; Judee Burgoon's

1978 expectancy violations theory, focusing on how communicators from different



cultures respond when their expectations are violated; and William B. Gudykunst's 1995

anxiety/ uncertainty management theory, which focuses on how communicators reduce

uncertainty and anxiety in cross-cultural situations. As another example, communication

accommodation theory, attributed to Howard Giles and others, looks at the ways in

which communicators accommodate various cultural practices in cross-cultural

situations.

In addition, cross-cultural investigations could focus on a variety of other

important variables. Michael H. Prosser in his 1978 book, The Cultural Dialogue,

identified several problems that could guide this work. Among other things, it could

investigate the role of conflict and conflict resolution, the ways in which communication

is used for control and power, the impact of technology and especially information

technology, cultural stability and cultural change, cultural imperialism, and cultural

dependency or interdependency.

Steve J. Kulich recommends a nine-level analysis offering themes for cross-

cultural research in which culture can be viewed in terms of (1) propagated mythic

ideals; (2) mainstream promotion or mass trends; (3) modelcitizen norms; (4) expected

behavior mechanics; (5) integrated meshworks, which includes a set of real or imagined

networks; (6) mediated metaphors; (7) mindless personal responses to familiarity;

(8) personal matrix options, such as recognizing that binary theories at each extreme

end of a spectrum must realize that instead some cultures are both traditional and

modern at the same time; and (9) personalized meaning. In the context of social

science research, Kulich proposes that an integrated grid can be developed in the

cross-cultural study of communication that incorporates cultural, subcultural, contextual,

and individual levels of culture. An integrated grid includes cultural socialization that is

passed down vertically or horizontally within a culture; socially constructed perceptions

within the context of cultural groups; and personally interpreted meanings, which include

conceptual perceptions within social groups and reflective and relative meanings,

leading to Intercontextual studies. Kulich explains that at the cultural level, one needs to

consider such issues as ideal myths, mass trends, and model citizen norms. At the



subcultural or contextual level, he proposes that expected behavioral mechanics,

integrated meshworks, and mediated metaphors need to be considered, and at the

individual level, scholars need to interpret their own mindless responses, personal

matrix options, and personalized meanings.

Western Versus Non-Western Cross-Cultural Problems

Many early cross-cultural studies focused on comparisons between American

and Japanese, American and European, or American and Soviet cultural patterns. More

recently, considerable research has emphasized contrasting cultural aspects of the

Americans and Chinese or Chinese and other Westerners. Michael Harris Bond

recommends that while these bicultural studies are useful, including those by cross-

cultural psychologists, they use Western research methods to deal with indigenous

cultural patterns. He urges cross-cultural researchers to move toward more pancultural

studies, as Hofstede's studies have done, and that for serious reliability, at least 10

cultural groups are needed when standard social science statistical measurements are

used.

CHANG, Hui-ching proposes that in building cross-cultural theory incorporating

both Western and Asian ideologies, the central starting point for several Asian societies

must be Confucianism. This requires the recognition that Asian cross-cultural theories

about relationships, intimacy, interpersonal communication, and intercultural

communication have Confucian roots. However, at the same time, Confucianism must

be integrated with modern theories and must compete with both ancient and

contemporary Western and other Asian theories. Her research program, leading to the

potential construction of cross-cultural theories, first explored folk concepts leading to

relationships developed in Chinese society and then showed how these relationships

develop between the East and the West through cultural exchanges such as popular

books, workshops, and seminars. Finally, she shows how these relationship ideals

develop and expand microculturally through the ordinary language that Chinese use in

their daily lives. Fundamentally, she believes that cross-cultural theory construction for a



society such as China must concentrate on how the Chinese create these relationships

through their modern daily use of language. Cross-cultural researchers in such a setting

ideally should be bilingual, both in a Western language and in Chinese.

HWANG, Kwang-Kuo also argues that the development of social scientific cross-

cultural research in the indigenous Asian setting is problematic because Western social

science methods are not always appropriate to study indigenous Asian cultural factors.

He believes those Western social science theories, or the scientific microworld versus

the indigenous Asian lifeworld for intellectuals in non-Western countries, have serious

limitations as the philosophy of science for constructing a scientific microworld is

essentially a product of alien cultures inconsistent with practical Asian cultural traditions.

Thus, a cross-cultural communication researcher must construct a tentative theory to

solve scientific problems caused by inconsistencies between Western theories and the

observed phenomena or results of experiments in more traditional Asian societies,

contradictions within a system or theory, and conflicts between the two types of

theories. For example, formal justice in Western scientific cross-cultural studies includes

such basic elements as authority in an unequal relationship but does not practically

consider the notion of Confucian respect for the superior in determining what is just.

Referring to cross-cultural communication studies for Chinese scholars as

illustrative, GUAN, Shije notes several problems for China, and by implication for other

Asian cultures: (a) More dialectical research is conducted than empirical studies; (b) too

much research is conducted in individual disciplines rather than on an interdisciplinary

basis; (c) more general introductions are provided than on specific topics with Chinese

characteristics; (d) more Sino-U.S. research is done than comparisons of China with

other countries; and (e) more international studies than domestic cross-cultural research

are done of different Chinese communities in the mainland, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and in

the Chinese diaspora. He argues that this singularity of research methodology and

focus has been a bottleneck in restraining further in-depth cross-cultural Chinese and

Asian communication research.



Cultural Diversity Challenges: Issues for Managing Globally Distributed Knowledge Workers in Software DevelopmentHaiyan Huang

Eileen M. Trauth

Global Virtual Team

The globally distributed virtual team is the basic unit engaged in software

development work. A global virtual team can be defined as a collection of individuals

who are organizationally and globally dispersed, and culturally diverse, and who

communicate and coordinate work activity asynchronously or in real time primarily

through information and communication technologies (ICTs).

A variety of strategic and catalytic factors have contributed to the increasing

trend of using globally distributed virtual teams for software and information systems

development. These include: 24/7 around-the-clock development activities, the desire to

reduce development costs and have access to a global resource pool, and the proximity

to the customer. In addition, some authors have further emphasized the contribution of

diversity of heterogeneous teams to work performance brought about by globally

dispersed team members. For example, Maugain argued that the different thinking

modes and dissimilar problem solving methods brought in by diverse team members in

multicultural R&D (Research & Design) teams will stimulate novel ideas and creativity.

Hartenian pointed out that diverse groups have a tendency to make higher quality

decisions, to be more creatively motivated, and have a higher productivity potential than

less diverse groups.

However, research also shows that the absence of regular face-to-face

interactions and the breakdown of traditional communication and coordination

mechanisms are negatively associated with the effectiveness of globally distributed

software development teams. Systems development tasks, particularly front-end

activities, require formal and informal communication and coordination to facilitate

knowledge exchange and learning.



According to Herbsleb and Mockus, the change of communication patterns and

the lack of effective communication channels (formal or informal) in globally distributed

software development teams can lead to delays in global software development

projects. The study by Cramton and Webber shows a negative relationship between

geographic dispersion and perceived team performance with respect to complex and

interdependent tasks.

The cultural difference may further exacerbate the communication problems.

Carmel pointed out that the barriers of time, space, and cultural distances may be

detrimental to building trust and achieving team cohesiveness in global virtual teams.

Nicholson and Sahay argued that the barriers of knowledge sharing among knowledge

workers in offshore software development are related to the embeddedness of

knowledge in the local cultural context, and should be investigated at the interconnected

societal, organizational, and individual levels of analysis.

While cultural factors may influence global virtual teams engaged in a variety of

activities in general, they are particularly important to software development work for

three reasons. First, compared to other activities such as new product developments in

manufacturing sectors, the processes of software development are more complexly

interdependent and iterative, the products of software development are less tangible,

and knowledge perspectives involved in software development are more tacit and fast

changing in nature. Second, a number of studies have shown that culture is a critical

influential factor in global software development work and has impacts on a variety of

issues. While some issues are general issues faced by global virtual teams engaged in

other activities in general, building trust, some issues are specific to software

development, such as managing IT outsourcing relationships preference of software

development methods, preference of computer supported collaborative technologies,

knowledge transfer and management related to software development, and the process

and performance of globally distributed software development teams. Third, as more

and more countries are now entering the IT outsourcing market, global software

development work practices are facing more cultural diversity. Companies in Japan and



Korea join those of the US, Canada and other western European nations in outsourcing

their software or information system development and services activities to other

countries. Besides the current leading outsourced countries such as India, Ireland, and

Israel, Russia and China are now establishing their capabilities as outsourcing

providers.

Globally distributed software development efforts, thus, must deal with tradeoffs

between taking advantage of the global resource pool and cultural diversity while

managing the cultural and distance barriers to effective communication and coordination

in a geographically dispersed environment. How to make sense of cultural diversity and

its impact on managing globally distributed knowledge workers who are engaged in

global software development work activities are becoming the primary concerns of

global IT personnel management and knowledge management.

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN PROJECT MANAGEMENTRanf Diana Elena

The advantages of a multicultural team

Global project managers can use originality to deviate from general norms and

obtain competitive advantage, improving the likelihood of project success. An interesting

concept from recent research is crossvergence, which is “all about fusing together

management practices of two or more cultures, so that a practice relevant to a

heterogeneous culture can be assembled”. Global teams can provide all elements for

an effective fusion of different project management practices: people from various

country and company cultures, enriched by different experiences and management

theories, implemented by a team in different countries, with a wealthy mix of skills and

beliefs.

Hybridization is another concept on multicultural management, which can be

defined as the use of a common body of knowledge, enhanced with selective parts of



successful practices from the countries where the project is being implemented, or from

the team members' original culture.

You will also find different behaviors when working with a team of people from

the same country, as the values and norms from the cultural dimensions are not only

dependent on the nationality of team members. In our life, we can be part of different

cultural groups, cumulating experiences that help make us unique. Some examples of

characteristics that define our cultural groups can be:

- the region (inside the country); - the age or generation;

- the ethnic origin; - the education level;

- the religion; - the industry you work in;

- the language; - the company;

- the gender - the job function.

When starting a global project in a new country, or when new project team

members have a cultural origin that you never experienced before, the cultural

dimensions can be a first source of reference to understand their general mindset, and

the cultural patterns likely to be found in their culture. A second step is to read different

sources of information on the country, not only to show the team members that you care

for their culture, but to really understand how they live, think, and what the main sources

of cultural and economic richness are. The third step and the most important is to pay

attention to the behavior of the team members, to understand their values during

informal conversations and to show respect for these values, while letting them know

your own opinion, the project communication standards and the important norms that

must be followed for them to be accepted by the other team members.

The development of these skills is not a simple task, and can only be achieved

after some years of experience in multicultural teams. To reduce the time to master

these skills, and improve the likelihood of success in a first global project, you can

attend “soft-skills” training sessions and request coaching from more experienced global



project managers. Fisher and Fisher suggest that a good training plan will also include

language lessons (for people in frequent contact with a foreign language), technical

training (when there are different levels of understanding on technical disciplines that

can create conflicts or risks to the collaboration) and cross-cultural training (when team

members and key stakeholders come from different cultural backgrounds and there are

many differences in the cultural dimensions).

There are four steps framework for effective cross-cultural project management:

• Learn the definition and different types of culture – the cultural differences exist

across countries but are also influenced by a diversity of age, gender, regions,

religions and many other types of social groups.

• Understanding the cultural differences – use the cultural dimensions to know

what differences to expect between people from different cultures. Employ a

team building exercise to identify how your team and colleagues view these

differences.

• Respect the cultural differences – keep the differences in mind when confronted

with opposite views of the world. You must accept them and show respect for the

different standpoints.

• Enjoy the richness of a multi-cultural team. Remember that you can build on the

differences to identify and mitigate risks, to find alternative approaches and

achieve the project objectives in better ways, and to increase the level of

innovation and quality of your project deliverables.

The impact of cultural differences in project management

It is helpful if the project team members can meet each other face to face even

one time. While this can be very expensive, it may be much less expensive than not



performing well on the project. Sometimes, the core project team is assembled to write

and approve the project charter. The core team members would then know each other

and would be inclined to give each other the benefit of doubt if there is a

misunderstanding. Another method that is frequently used is to confirm meetings and

calls with quick meeting minutes or e-mail follow-ups. By documenting decisions, it is

easier to remember what happened and to uncover lessons learned when the project is

complete (Kloppenborg, J. Timothy, 2009, p. 118).

While abundant differences occur between people from various countries, the

method and timing of project communications are of interest here. For example, Mueller

and Turner studied how cultural differences impact preferred modes of project

management communication. They examined how collectivism versus individualism,

along with the extent individuals in various cultures accepts unequal power and

ambiguity, impact project communication preferences. The result show that country

preferences can be shown in four categories with common preferences on frequency

and type of communications for each group as shown in next figure.

Countries and Project Communication PreferencesSource: Ralf Mueller and Rodney Turner, “Cultural Differences in Project Owner-Project

Manager Communications”, Innovations Project Management Research 2004

Dean Martin identified the following seven major elements of culture, which

significantly influence the project management strategy and team development process:



1. Material culture (refers to physical objects or the results of technology).

2. Language (helps develop better understanding among team members).

3. Aesthetics (encourages informal and open communication).

4. Education (indicates how different team members view the problems).

5. Religion, beliefs and attitudes (affect general attitudes toward work ethics).

6. Social organization (helps in networking and setting informal meetings).

7. Political life (relates to approvals of permits, labor laws, import/export and

financial transactions).

Historically, project management was a face to face environment where tea

meetings involved all players convening together in one room. The team itself may even

be co-located. Today, because of the size and complexity of projects, it is impossible to

find all team members located under one roof. So, we are talking about virtual project team. The importance of culture cannot be understated. There are four important

points to remember concerning the impact of culture on virtual teams identified by

Duarte and Snyder.

The four points are (Kerzner, Harold, 2009, p. 354):

1. There are national cultures, organizational cultures, functional cultures, and

team cultures. They can be sources of competitive advantages for virtual

teams that know how to use cultural differences to create synergy. Team

leaders and members who understand and are sensitive to cultural

differences can create more robust outcomes than can members of

homogeneous teams with members who think and act alike. Cultural

differences can create distinctive advantages for teams if they are understood

and used in positive ways.

2. The most important aspect of understanding and working with cultural

differences is to create a team culture in which problems can be surfaced and



differences can be discussed in a productive, respectful manner.

3. It is essential to distinguish between problems that result from cultural

differences and problems that are performance based.

4. Business practices and business ethics vary in different parts of the world.

Virtual teams need to clearly articulate approaches to these that every member

understands and abides by.

Improving Project Productivity with Diverse MembershipMichael Stephen Bird

Trend towards Heterogeneous Project Teams:

As the changing demographics and heterogeneous make up of project team

members are reshaping the workplace culture, inclusive organizations could have the

opportunity to create a favorable condition for team member retention, job satisfaction,

and overall team motivation. This favorable condition could lead to a productive

information system project that delivers a system product efficiently and effectively. It is

imperative for project managers to understand cultures of diverse project teams,

especially teams that span across the globe. This has become important with the

increasing number of programming resources being outsourced overseas, while the

project managers, systems analyst, and the user community involved in the project

team are usually located locally.

According to Iles and Hayers, it is becoming evident that project teams are not

homogeneous groups but now heterogeneous in nature. In order to manage challenging

projects, the leader must improve relations among the diverse participants in order to

generate new solutions that lead to the team's success against strategic goals.

There is an increase in the median age of project team members which will

require new management practices. Jamieson and O'Mara stated that the median age

of the current workforce has increased tremendously over the last thirty years. The

median age was only twenty-eight in 1970 and has risen to forty by 2000. From this

research, one can see that employees older than forty-five will increase by thirty percent



within the next few years. With this trend, a lot of the members on project teams will be

middle aged. This increase in older team members will require different motivational

incentives and management techniques. For example, older team members will require

more time off for medical attention, family issues, and other personal concerns. They

will also be worried about paying for college of their children and saving for retirement.

While older employees require differing incentives than the younger counterparts,

the difference in the various make up of the team members will result in the need of

flexible incentives. Based on Jamieson and O'Mara, as more women and single parents

enter the workforce, members of the project team will require quality time with their

children and allowance will be necessary for child-related emergencies, regardless of

the team member's gender. Disabled project team members are becoming more active

due to new laws against discrimination of disabled workers. This will result in the

manager having some project tasks redesigned to best utilize their competencies.

These are issues that the current project manager has to consider that were not factors

several years ago.

There are an increasing number of cultures that make up the membership of the

project team environment, which makes it important to match rewards to the cultural

values of heterogeneous team members. Project managers are now challenged to

integrate the increasing number of cultures that make up today's project teams.

While these diverse cultures of project team members have been increasing

within the internal employees of the organization, these project teams are further

compounded by outsourcing certain portions of the project resources, especially the

application programming portion, according to Iles and Hayers. These outsourced

resources include members of various countries, such as India, China, Russia, and

other countries with growing numbers of talented young engineers that can provide the

same level of programming resources at a much lower cost. Iles and Hayers further

states that due to differing cultures, the normal reward structures may not be effective

across the international lines.



Matching Project Team Members and Jobs:

In light of the increasing heterogeneous project teams, it is important to match

the rewards with the cultural values of different groups and successfully blend the

culturally diverse team members. This includes all members regardless of gender, race,

nationality, age, or disability. Jamieson and O'Mara discuss the key to managing this

type of human resources is flex-management. This type of management is the

establishment of core values that treats individual team members as critical assets to

the project team that need proper development and maintenance. In flex-management,

it is important that the project manager must compare the team member's skills and

abilities to the project task specifications, including the required behaviors, as well as

skills and preferences. Jamieson and O'Mara points out that Debbie Biondolillo at

Apple Computer feel "a match between company values and individual values is critical

to success." The company may have to interview up to fifteen possible resources to

ensure a proper match. Progressive project managers, with the help of human

resources, will identify those projects that team members feel most comfortable in order

to provide the greatest potential to succeed. For example, 3M Corporation allows their

researchers to spend fifteen percent of each week to work on projects of their choice.

Redesigning project tasks will allow team members to fit their individual needs

and goals. Then, each member will contribute their services to the team where the

traditional methods would force the member to resign. Flexible work hours for

completing the project tasks could let team members balance family and project task

responsibilities. Additionally, if two or more project members share similar tasks,

motivation of team members could increase which reduce turnover and heighten

morale. The result would increase the overall project team's performance. According to

Kent, people management becomes more demanding in the international arena where

cultural differences can affect team member's personal and business behavior. Ian

Henderson, director of SPC Associates, says "You need to have different styles of

management and adapt your style to get the best out of every person you work with".

Mr. Henderson continues by saying, "The attributes of the manager for the 21st century



will be the understanding of that difference in behavior and the ability to respond to it."

In other words, best business practices might be viewed similarly across the world, but

the way people operate is not the same. Redesigning jobs to better fit the team

member's differences and developing a better understanding of team member's various

cultures can aid in the overall performance of the project team.

Watson, Johnson, and Merritt reflect an assertion that heterogeneity of project

team members can be a positive influence over problem solving tasks. Additionally,

proper management approaches over heterogeneous teams can lead to improvement in

trust, communication, and enhanced implementation, which will enhance this positive

influence. Team success can evolve from group discussions which stimulate the

development of ideas, insights, and strategies that individuals usually cannot consider.

Watson, Johnson, and Merritt provides an example of when diverse groups discuss

problems, these groups tend to have been found to provide a larger number of crucial

insights as to solving problems than did the individuals working alone. These authors

also point out that groups are also more likely to identify and reject incorrect solutions to

problems and they facilitate a higher motivation to achieve. Therefore group synergy

can be realized through cooperation of team members by promoting each other's

success.

A diversity advisory, Dianah Worman, wrote an article in Personnel

Today supporting the theory that poor diversity management is bad for business and

recommends that a diversity-balanced scorecard could be the answer to help project

teams impact overall performance. Managing diversity will allow the project teams to

reach greater opportunities leading to improved performance. Additionally, it will pave

the way for project teams to become more innovative and responsive in handling

business problems. According to Worman, there is growing evidence that links cost

reductions, improved efficiency, and better team philosophy with proper management of

diversity by the project manager.

In an article from the Training Journal, a diversity advisory, Dianah Worman,

stated, "'A diverse workforce bringing different people together, with different views,

ideas, experiences, and perspectives can bring real benefits for business performance.



But managed badly, efforts to improve diversity can have the opposite effect, creating

conflict and tension in the workplace". In other words, ignoring diversity can reduce

productivity and performance. Also, badly managed efforts will only run the risk of team

conflict and will also undermine the overall project team's performance. In an effort for

project managers to allow the benefits of diversity to be achieved, they will need to

focus on changing team cultures and embrace the differences. Managing diversity is

achieving a balance between differences of the individuals and the project task

challenges at hand. How can this be achieved? This balance can be achieved by

utilizing the social psychology management approach.

Iles and Hayers reflect evidence from social psychology that national culture has

an effect on perceptions, behaviors, and values in several ways. Project managers

adopting the social psychology approach will utilize the personality differences and

other aspects of heterogeneity within the project team to positively influence the quality

of problem solving within the group. Iles and Hayers also indicated much research has

explored the role of diversity in group performance. These authors also point out that

the ability to learn through international project teams can become a significant

developer in the international spectrum, where project teams help the organization

share information, knowledge, and resources across the boundary lines that help

reshape corporate culture, providing examples in best practices. Therefore, it is

important for project managers to accept the social psychology approach and

encourage the differences in a manner to improve the overall success of projects across

the multi-national lines.

Project managers can implement project policies and procedures that emphasize

performance and individual differences in style and preferences. These project

managers need to understand the process of treating diversity as an asset instead of an

adversary. Based on the research that has been discussed in this section, it can be

concluded that information and experiences can tap team member's individual strengths

and perspectives. This places a responsibility on developing managers to have good

interpersonal skills and develop high tolerance of ambiguity. However, when a manager

understands the social psychology approach and incorporate the flex-management



approach, the project manager will find overall improvement in the project team's

success with team members' higher motivation and zeal for improved performance.

Managing the Heterogeneous Project Team:

Understanding the differences that are natural in the heterogeneous teams and

the advantages that can be recognized by the project manager when these teams are

managed properly is only the beginning. The best practice management techniques

must be explored and placed into practice by these project managers. Research has

presented that there are five important steps to ensure project team success:

Understand and define the membership diversity

Understand the organization's values and needs

Plan and manage the resistance to change

Review and evaluate results and overall team performance

Refine and improve management techniques

According to Jamieson and O'Mara, it is important for project managers to

understand and define the team members' diversity. This is done by taking an inventory

of the approximate age (young, middle age, or older), ethnicity, gender, education

(college graduate or not), nationality, and disability of each member. The project

manager must be careful to not break any discrimination laws while generating this

inventory and must be well-supported that the purpose is to serve the needs of all

members. This inventory can only be at a high-level, and can be done by interviewing

and observing. It is not necessary to document such an inventory and to be exact on the

numbers, as the main objective is to have an understanding as to the diverse make up

of the project team.

The next step is to understand the team member's values and needs by performing

research that will allow the project manager to build an understanding of the

organization's values and needs among the project team members, according to

Jamieson and O'Mara. There are management techniques to determine the needs,

values, and potential goals in the consideration of the age, ethnicity, gender, education,

and disability of the individual team members assigned to the project. The influences of



culture on the team members' perception and behavior are difficult, but the

understanding of these influences is critical when managing culturally diverse project

teams. A well-designed satisfaction survey of the team members at the beginning of the

project can provide candid and objective feedback of the cultural expectations of each

team member. The project manager can use a relevant, clear, and user-friendly survey

instrument. The collection process could be a turnaround system on the intranet, form

sent via email, or other such effective method. Understanding the team member's

diversity and individual needs is an important first step to the overall success of the

project.

Once you have defined the cultural differences and develop an understanding of

team member's values and needs, then the project manager can begin to match the

project tasks effectively. Iles and Hayers states that utilizing the quantitative data from

the survey will identify the team members whose culture are task oriented and who are

more relationship-oriented. This is important to identify in order to match the proper

tasks to each member. A relationship-oriented individual will not be satisfied working

with task-oriented project tasks and vice versa. The project manager can gain synergy

from the differences when the project tasks are assigned in accordance to the

individual's belief system, as well as their core competencies.

Additionally, it is important to understand religious issues. For example, if the

project requires tasks to be assigned seven days a week, some religions hold Saturday

as an important religious day and others hold Sunday as important. Assigning staff

accordingly will aid in project team satisfaction. Cultural awareness on the project

manager's part will be a major benefit to the success of the project.

The third step is for the project manager to implement techniques to aid in the

elimination of team members' resistance to change, which might have been formed by

the team member while being a part of former homogeneous groups. A change in

attitudes of these individuals will be necessary as they are reassigned to new

homogeneous teams. Bagshaw indicates that a project manager can embrace the skills,

experience, and ideas that result from the varying backgrounds that society offers

today. The manager can build on the areas of agreement than to identify what is not



working. Bagshaw continues to say that the latter will cause resistance in the team

members who appear to have a vested interest in the previous homogeneous teams.

Once the manager builds on the positive aspects, a greater acceptance of the team

members will become evident, allowing the variety to produce a resource for innovation.

When tensions on the team build due to the heterogeneous nature of the team

make up, the project manager must step in to take a leadership role. It is important to

develop a sense of group norms that is acceptable by the consensus of the group

members. This will build a better sense of trust, creativity, and accountability. It is

extremely important to identify these group norms in the early stages of the project.

However, how does the project manager develop these group norms and build up the

team trust?

According to Jung, teambuilding is a response to reduce conflicts of

heterogeneous groups and increase overall productivity. Once the teambuilding

techniques have been implemented, the team can start to focus on a common vision,

mission, and goal. As a result, the team can direct their primary activities toward that

purpose. One technique of this teambuilding process as pointed out by Jung includes

activities and exercises that have been included to recognize some contributions that

individual team members bring to the team as a whole. Activities that involve affirming

the different personality types and allowing for participants to begin communicating

better will become effective. This will occur after the members build trust and

understanding of each other.

Jung points out teambuilding activities require considerable attention to the

infrastructure of the team and the overall project's objectives. This teambuilding process

can be conducted in the beginning of any project of heterogeneous make up, especially

if many of the team members are not use to working on such teams. Jung indicates that

the members can be able to answer the following questions:

Why are we together on this team?

What is our mission?



What resources or external support do we need to be able to accomplish our

goals?

While these activities take some time to conduct in a usually tight schedule,

ignoring these could be costly in the long run as team conflicts and miscommunication

result from not conducting the teambuilding techniques. Teamwork has many positive

rewards as it becomes a useful tool to promote project productivity. Failure to build

teamwork can result in lost trust, motivation, and poor communication among team

members in the long term.

Bouley, sums up this importance with a quote from Jim Pennypacker who is a

director of the Center for Business Practices in Havertown, Pennsylvania. "A number of

research studies have shown that one of the key success factors that may be the

number one success factor in being able to lead project teams is the ability to build trust

among team members and among stakeholders," he says. "That's important in every

team and project, but it gets more difficult with more complex teams, particularly virtual

teams where there aren't necessarily face-to-face interactions. You have to work harder

at building that trust”. Therefore, investing in the time to build trust before a project

starts will be a proactive start to prevent problems.

Bagshaw identifies four primary points to remember as the project manager works with

heterogeneous teams. These are:

Check and test all assumptions of group members

Communicate with empathy and respect

Create a climate of inclusion

Challenge inappropriate behavior of individual team members

These points are generally a part of the project manager's overall approach

during the teambuilding stage and consistently carried out throughout the entire project.

The manager will discuss the project with some team members individually and as a

group to determine if there are any assumptions that the team may have and will need

to be corrected. This includes all aspects of group think, which results in reducing the

number of ideas, ultimately to just one idea. Without considering quality alternatives, it is



assumed by the group that they already have the best solution once groupthink sets in.

Therefore, the project manager must eliminate groupthink by checking and testing all

assumptions that the team members may have.

The manager will need to always communicate with empathy and respect to all

team members. This is an important part of a leader that will also aid in creating a

climate of inclusion. All ideas will be welcomed and no individual will feel afraid to

express their ideas. If the team member's idea is not utilized, the project manager will

express his/her appreciation for receiving the alternative.

The manager must always be aware of inappropriate behavior of individual team

members. Whenever a team member seeks to exclude other team members or try to

create a climate of groupthink where his/her ideas are the only ones considered, the

project manager must put a stop to this activity. This is done by communicating privately

with the team member and encouraging the member to accept other input. This will be

done in a positive manner and rewards can be provided to those who have appropriate

group behavior. The rewards could be as simple as an expression of appreciation.

The fourth step is to review and evaluate results, including overall team

performance. There are methods to monitor and measure the results and productivity of

the project team to ensure success and determine any weaknesses to the overall

effectiveness explains that in a cultural diverse team, it can become difficult to control

the progress of project tasks since each individual's working style is different. For

example, Robert J. Tarne, PMP, senior consultant with PM Solutions, states "The

person might say they are 50 percent done, but without being there to check in on them,

you have no idea how far along they really are or what the quality of the work is". He

continues to say, "Virtual workspaces can give you some ability to track progress, but

there will always be some sense of the unknown".

It is important to establish a method of accountability from the start of the project.

This can be done by developing a uniform method of measurement and apply it

consistently throughout the project. For example, if the programming group is going to

program fifty screens with an average of 2000 lines of code each, then the manager can



use the lines of code completed to determine the percentage of each screen and then

extrapolate it to the total number of screens. This will give a uniform status throughout

the project development process. This will eliminate opinions or subjective progress

reports. Instead, an objective measurement will be provided by all team members

allowing the project manager to properly control the project.

If the measurements reflect a problem, the manager must determine if the

problem is a result of cultural differences or other normal project management issues.

For basic, non-culture issues that can arise during the course of a project, the manager

should not have any problems because this would be a part of their normal training.

However, when the issue is due to cultural differences, then the project manager must

reevaluate their process and make the necessary adjustments. As with any

management technique, the project manager must always continue to monitor and

measure all elements to ensure that they are on the right track, including the

heterogeneous management approaches being applied during the project phases.

During the project the manager can refine and improve management techniques.

Additionally, after the project is completed a post evaluation period can be completed to

measure the overall results of managing the diverse teams, which is the fifth step. After

the evaluation process, the project manager will implement new approaches and

techniques as a constant improvement process of the project team management

process, which will ensure even better success on future projects.

Project team managers will need to adopt these innovative methods to effectively

and efficiently manage project teams of individuals from different cultures,

heterogeneous mixes, and differing demographics. Managing diversity properly will lead

to increased productivity in project teams that will be completed efficiently and

effectively. There has been evidence reflected in this research paper that project teams

will benefit from diverse talent, as long as they move away from the existing

organizational culture.

Based on the research presented within the five-step management process, the

following positive approaches can be adopted by the project managers leading such



heterogeneous teams in order to seek positive effects of managing diversity in project

teams effectively:

Recognize that diversity will bring a greater skills base when managed properly

Improve the overall climate on diverse project teams in order to improve

satisfaction, reduce conflicts, and improve team member retention

Encourage creativity, flexibility, and innovation among the team members which

will allow the injection of new ideas and challenge the normal organizational

mindsets

Managing diversity will lead to the success of project teams by utilizing these

positive approaches. Project managers who also understand these social

psychology techniques of managing projects will be able to successfully manage

and lead the project teams of individuals from different cultures, heterogeneous

mixes, and differing demographics. As a result, projects will be managed

efficiently and effectively, as well as promote an increase in team member

motivation and satisfaction levels.

Cross-Cultural Communication

The following are based on the manual of Managing Cultural Differences in which they give examples on various aspect of cross-cultural communication issues and the misunderstandings that may arise.

Personal Space

We all have an invisible bubble of space around us that we consider our personal space: Our “comfort zone.” We usually only allow people who are close to us emotionally (children, parents, partners, or close friends) to come physically close to us. When strangers enter this personal space bubble, their presence generates a strong “flight or fight” emotional reaction. We become tense and defensive or we may step back, cross our arms, laugh, and so on, as ways to either re-establish distance or to bring strangers emotionally closer to us.

In multicultural situations, misunderstandings may arise during conversations



between diverse people because the size of this invisible bubble varies from culture to culture. If someone with a smaller personal space stands at the distance that feels “right,” this distance might be too small for someone else; they get the “flight or fight” feeling that tends to prevent participation in the conversation. Subconsciously, the person who has a larger personal space may get annoyed because the other person “does not have the right to come this close.”

If these two people stand at the distance that feels “right” for the person with the larger personal space, the distance is too large for the other person. The latter is likely to subconsciously feel snubbed, perceiving the behavior as standoffish and a “put-down” when no such thing is intended.

Body Language and Gestures

Communication through body language can result in many misunderstandings. In Canada, making eye contact implies involvement, respect and attention. In other cultures, making eye contact is disrespectful.

Smiles mean very different things to different people. In Canada, people smile in order to demonstrate friendliness towards strangers. In some cultures, people smile only “when there is something to smile about,” such as when a business relationship is moving in the right direction.

People who smile at strangers are perceived in some cultures as either simple-minded or trying to take advantage of them. People from these cultures may react defensively when strangers smile at them.

Smiling in some cultures is used to hide strong emotions, like embarrassment or anger that should not be displayed. Some people may smile when someone brings up a topic that they would rather not discuss, like the death of a loved one, or to show when they are angry.

Physical contact is also subject to misinterpretations. In Canada, any physical contact between strangers is an accident and results in an apology. In other cultures, physical contact is far more common, from daily greetings to bumping into people in the streets or public transport.

Tone of Voice & Emotions

The range in tone of voice and emotions that can be safely expressed in the work place is culturally determined. As always, there are variations among individuals. Within



the same culture, some people express more emotions than others. Variations from culture to culture tend to be quite noticeable in many cases and create major challenges in the workplace.

When someone expresses more positive emotions than is customary by Canadian standards (such as being excessively happy), this person is perceived as childish, exuberant or over the top. In general, this situation does not create major problems.

When someone expresses more negative emotions than is customary by Canadian standards (such as showing frustration about a project), this usually has major negative consequences. If this takes place during a meeting, Canadians will agree to anything this person wants just to terminate the meeting as quickly as possible, then reconvene the meeting without him or her. They will then undo what was agreed upon during the previous meeting and find entirely different solutions. The opinions and ideas of the person who was considered “out of control” will not be taken into consideration.

When someone expresses less emotion than is customary by Canadian standards, Canadians are not able to determine whether the person they are dealing with is happy or unhappy. This often generates frustration when they are trying to obtain a qualitative assessment of the situation.

Sense of Humor

What people find funny varies immensely from culture to culture. While a good joke brings a sense of connection and builds rapport between people, a bad joke can destroy trust by offending people unwittingly: One bad joke can erase the trust created by ten good ones.

Dress Code

What someone wears often affects the way other people perceive them: If someone is overdressed by other’s standards, that person will be perceived as

trying to be more important than others. If someone is underdressed by other’s standards, that person will be perceived

as not taking others seriously. If someone does not wear a piece of equipment required for safety or practical

reasons, that person will be perceived as not knowing the work environment.



Acronyms & Abbreviations

People in different cultures do not use the same acronyms, abbreviate the same words or do not abbreviate words in the same manner. This may result in significant confusion.

For example, in Indian organizations, employees refer to long-distance and international calls as “STD’s” which in North America stands for “sexually transmitted diseases.” In one instance, an employee issued a document explaining how to make STDs throughout the organization. When this document reached the parent U.S. organization, it created both confusion and laughter.

Some acronyms or abbreviations may mean something comical or offensive in other languages. For example, Toyota had to change the name of its MR2 in its French market, since MR2 sounds really bad in French (“merdeux” or “crappy, filthy” in English).

As another example, a Venezuelan was quite offended when a Canadian described the Canadian International Development Agency using the acronym CIDA. CIDA sounds like the Spanish acronym for AIDS (SIDA).

Communication Style

It is very important to realize that not only do people have different communication style inside of a cultural group, but the paradigm of the communicator may be completely different than the project leaders when dealing with multi-cultural teams. Malcolm Gladwell has an excellent anecdote about how cultural differences can play a major role in the outcome of events. In the chapter of The Ethnic Theory of Plane Crashes, he notes how in some cultures subordinates are not allowed to question their leaders (McCartney, 2008). He goes on to recount how this cultural phenomenon resulted in a co-pilot on Korean Air flight 881 knew the plane was flying too low and might crash, but felt he was unable to tell the captain that he was wrong.

A good project manager should recognize these differences and be able to facilitate free expression of ideas.

Edward T. Hall was an anthropologist that made great advances in cultural theory. Some of his most well known work is the high and low context cultural theories



(Sysque). After reading his theories about how cultural differences can be identified and examined, one will be much better apt to dig deeper into a team member’s behavior outside of its appearances. One thing that struck me the most was the following quote:

When working across cultures, pay attention to high and low cultures through the actions of others. For example if people are late for meetings it may be because they are polychronic, not because they are disrespectful or lazy.

When you understand the personal, national or organizational culture, then you can seek to align with them and hence gain greater influence. (Sysque)

One of the major benefits to leading a team that has cultural differences is the fact that by definition, the team members have different backgrounds. This means they likely have different paradigms on the world and can solve the same problem in a multitude of ways. This is key when it comes to solving problems that arise. As a project leader, you can tap into their vast and varied knowledge to choose the best ideas (or combine the ideas) to solve the problem.

Although working in multi-cultural teams seem to be difficult at times, once you learn to value the differences in the team members for the benefits they bring, it can be a very rewarding endeavor.


Date post:	06-Feb-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	duongtu
View:	212 times
Download:	0 times

Cultural Diversity in Software Project Management Web viewproject management today. In the...

Documents