A cross-cultural comparison of Asian and American managers' dependency patterns

Multinational Business Review, Spring 1997 by Michael, James

Dependency patterns between managers is an important construct for understanding power and managerial behavior and effectiveness in organizations. This paper draws cross-cultural comparisons of dependency patterns of Asian and American managers and offers explanations as to why differences exist. Major differences are noted between American and Asian managers, and specifically between American and Koreans/Chinese, and Japanese and Koreans/Chinese. Dependency patterns between Korean and Chinese managers are similar. Some of the differences are explained by economic factors but most are caused by cultural work values. Even when similarities in dependency patterns are observed between these countries, the underlying motives generating these patterns are different. The impact that these dependency patterns have on expatriate training programs and future research are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

A key to managerial effectiveness is the ability to understand the dynamics of power and influence and how to wield them (Pfeffer, 1992). A fundamental theme of the power literature is the notion that power is closely related to managerial dependence (Mechanic, 1962; Hickson, Hinings, Lee, Schneck & Pennings, 1971; Salancik & Pfeffer, 1977). Dependency is defined as the extent to which one manager requires the cooperation, support, and/or resources from another in order to carry out job responsibilities effectively and achieve a faster promotional rate (Michael & Yukl, 1993). Those managers who pay careful attention to patterns of dependencies, whether they be internal or external to the organization, and develop network relationships that correspond to these dependencies are more likely to be powerful and effective (Pfeffer, 1992) and gain faster promotions (Luthans, Hodgetts, & Rosenkrantz, 1988).

While much has been written about Asian management practices, we know little about any similarities and differences in dependency patterns between Asian and American managers. Are Asian managers equally dependent upon their bosses, peers, subordinates, and other internals as American managers? Are Asian managers equally dependent upon external contacts as American managers? Are there any differences in dependency patterns between Asian cultures? Using cultural work values, this paper will make cross-cultural comparisons of dependency patterns in China, South Korea, Japan, and the United States. Understanding these dependency patterns can have an impact on how cross-cultural training programs are designed, help expatriate managers adapt to new cultural environments, and open up new avenues of cross-cultural managerial behavior research.

UNDERSTANDING DEPENDENCIES

According to the strategic contingencies theory of managerial power, dependencies are created when a manager has something of value that others want, is in short supply, and cannot be easily substituted (Hickson et al., 1971; Mintzberg, 1983). Managers are dependent upon others for support of their plans, coordination of interdependent tasks that cut across work units, solving mutual problems, and gaining helpful advice on both job- and career-related matters (Kaplan, 1984; Van de Ven & Ferry, 1980). The division of labor that exists in organizations puts inexorable pressure on people to interact and find ways to form cooperative relationships (Sayles, 1964). Managers who cannot control all the resources needed for them to perform their jobs and lack sufficient formal authority over those who possess these resources, are required to develop and maintain interpersonal relationships that are outside the traditional vertical chain (Michael & Yukl, 1993).

Dependency patterns, and in turn interpersonal relationships that are subsequently formed, have many targets. Besides the traditional boss-subordinate relationship, relationships are formed horizontally with peers in other work units, and junior and senior people who are not in the immediate work unit. Targets external to the organization include: customers, suppliers, and other externals such as trade and government officials, managers from other organizations, consultants, and academics.

Michael & Yukl (1993) have demonstrated empirically how internal dependency acts as a mediator between managerial level and internal networking behaviors and external dependency acts as a mediator between managerial function and external networking behaviors. Thus managers will initiate relationships with various targets as a means of dealing with their perceived dependencies.

AMERICAN DEPENDENCY PATTERNS

American managers have demonstrated a strong predilection towards networking with others who are outside the traditional vertical link between boss and subordinate. Underlying networking activities are transactional contents which include the exchange of affect (liking and friendship) and power (influence, information, and favors) (Tichy, Tushman, & Fombrun, 1979). "Trade routes" are established between individuals which permit frequent exchanges of resources and favors (Kaplan, 1984). While some interactions serve only affect purposes, many networking behaviors have power as an underlying transactional content (Michael, 1994). At the very least, various social behaviors help build personal relationships from which power, resources, and information may eventually be secured (Kotter, 1985). This is characteristic of American organizational behavior that is not widely seen in Japanese, Chinese, or Korean organizations.