Cross-cultural management:

Business report

Executive summary
In the multicultural cooperation, the important point was full of understand partners
cultural background, because order to avoidance some conflict happen and achieve
the cooperation successful in the cooperation, better to do the researching the culture
background was necessary. Therefore we are the leader company (UK Company) will
understand our partners (USA and Japan) culture before and put forward some
suggestion in the meeting according the research result to increase the rate of
international cooperation.
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

Contents
Background 1
Methodology 1
1.0 Introduction2
2.0 Culture 2
2.1Hall 2
2.2 Hofstede 3
2.3 CPAS 5
3.0 Recommendations 8
4.0 Conclusion 9
References 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

Background
Our companies (UK) need to win a international project, in this situation we need a
international team to help us win this project, therefore as the leader company, we
choice Japan and USA company become our partners, so UK company CEO will
prepare a report to solve some problem and improve development in the multicultural
cooperation. In the end, I will put forward some my mind to improve communication
and cooperation for this meeting and development.

Methodology
In this report, I will use Hall, Hofstede and CPAS to analyze three countries’ culture,
and then I will compare that culture different to put forward some problem in this
cooperation.

Because the Hall dimension was very important theory to explain the culture profiling
and express the people will influence country’s culture. Because the Robert was
commented that hall’s research was reflecting the deep regard for culture and using
describe method to express most of culture profiling. Therefore I will use Hall
dimension to analyze this report. (Shuter Robert 2008)

Hofstede (1980) have some clearly figure, therefore it became a good way to express
my mind in this report and Hofstede was very famous, because “using the Hofstede
framework as a foundation, a conceptual model of the effect of culture and
interpersonal orientation on countries business to business relationship” ( J Busn Res
1998 135-143). In the Hofstede (1980) 5 dimensions ： Power
Distance ， Individualism ， Uncertainty avoidance ， Masculinity and Long term
orientation。Every different score will express the different culture in country.

Cultural Profiling and Analysis System (CPAS) was including 12 dimensions, it was better than

Hofstede 5 dimension, therefore it will make more clearly and easily to analyze different cultural

profiling, the information was coming Northampton Business School Cross-Culture management

1 / 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

Student Book.

1.0 Introduction
In this report, I will use Hall (1960), Hofstede (1980) and CPAS (2000) to analyze
UK, USA and Japan Culture profiling, it will help the meeting successful hold up and
put forward some suggestion according the result for the meeting and improve the
cooperation development. It was the important way to set up our international
relationship to achieve the first international cooperation in this international project
in our company.

2.0 Culture

2.1 Hall

UK USA JAP
Context Low context Low context High context
Time Monochronic time Monochronic time Polychronic time
Space High territoriality High territoriality Low territoriality
Table 1 Hall's model

In these three dimensions, I will clearly to explain what they mean and their express.

2.1.1 Context: UK and USA is Low context, JAP is High Context, it

was mean that UK will keep more reticent when they finish some
introduce, and American like positive put some ideas in their
mind and using some body language sometime, compare USA,
Japan would be more euphemistic give some suggestion.

2.1.2 Time: UK and USA is Monochronic time, JAP is Polychronic

time. They were mean that UK and USA have a stronger time
review, and put their jobs as the first important thing in their life,
and compare that, the relationship was the Japanese important
point.

2 / 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

2.1.3 Space: UK and USA is High territoriality, JAP is Low

territoriality. It was mean that the contract was very important for
UK and USA, but Japanese think about contract just a
relationship’s expression. In this situation, we need take care
about the cooperation relationship with Japan and USA.

According this information, as the result about some problem will happen in the
meeting, for example, USA will add some body language when they put forward their
suggestions, and UK will direct their opinion when the Japan expresses their mind.
Therefore we need prepare some ways to solve these problems to achieve successful
in the future.

2.2 Hofstede

UK USA JAP
Power Distance 35 40 54
Individualism 89 91 46
Masculinity 66 62 95
Uncertainty avoidance 35 46 92
Long term orientation 25 29 80
Table 2 Hofstede's model

I will one by one to explain this figure.

2.2.1 Power Distance ： UK score was 35, USA score was 40, Japan
score was 54.According this figure analyzes, the UK and USA
was quite same, and Japan was higher than others, it was mean
that UK and USA haven’t fix level policy. It was less the manager
power and makes it to share every employer and respect
employers’ suggestion. Compare that, Japan have a lot of level
policy in the company, the manager will stronger their position
and control the company development.

2.2.2 Individualism ： UK score was 89 ， UKS score was 91 ， Japan

score was 46。Japan was lower than others in the figure. It was

3 / 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

mean that UK and USA was more respect personal suggests and
employers’ attitude in the working. But Japan was thought about
team work as much as the important in the working.

2.2.3 Masculinity ： UK score was 66 ， USA score was 62 ， Japan

score was 95. Compare these figures, Japan was the highest and
UK and USA was quite same. Therefore, late to close was normal
phenomenon in Japan, they think about successful was the
important, but UK and USA was the complete opposition.

2.2.4 Uncertainty avoidance ： UK score was 35 ， USA score was

46，Japan score was 92.It was mean that UK and USA was easily
to receive the UN-know things happen in the future. The
uncertainty cannot influence their working plan, but Japan was
made more clearly plan to avoidance the Uncertainty happened.

2.2.5 Long term orientation ： UK score was 25 ， USA score was

29， Japan score was 80.It was mean that the UK was take care
the tradition, they favor according the plan to achieve the
development, and USA was take care efficiency, they favor to
challenge something to make them successful, but Japan was very
attention development in the future and take care the cooperation

In this situation, Japan have a high power distance maybe will have some conflicts
with UK and USA, because UK and USA was favor working in the low pressure,
therefore Japan would be think about UK and USA have not really attitude to face the
international cooperation.

2.3 CPAS

UK USA JAP

4 / 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

Strategic horizon 18 24 88
Expression of emotion 78 20 78
Hierarchical orientation 46 20 53
Relationship orientation 9 10 64
Status orientation 27 0 90
Profit orientation 31 11 100
Systems orientation
Ambiguity orientation 32 45 100
Rule orientation 40 11 58
Control orientation 53 0 100
Gender orientation 32 37 0
Group orientation 29 8 71
Table 3 CPAS's model

2.3.1 Strategic horizon：UK score was 18，USA score was 24，Japan

score was 88. The Japan was the highest, because Japan was take
care the long time benefit in the business negotiation, by the way,
the High-Uncertainty Avoidance give them more pressure in the
working, therefore they need a clearly plan to help them, but UK
and USA was complete opposition.

2.3.2 Expression of emotion ： UK score was 78, SA score was

20 ， Japan score was 78. UK and Japan was the same figure
because they both take care the relationship in their country,
differently, UK think about the working successful was the first
point in the business, but Japan was think about relationship was
the key point to improve the business cooperation, The USA was
the lowest country, it was mean that USA do not set more
relationship in the business, they favor the individual working in
the business.

2.3.3 Hierarchical orientation ： UK score was 46 ， USA score was

20，Japan score was 53。This analyze as same as the Hofstede
(1980) power distance.

2.3.4 Relationship orientation ： UK score was 9 ， USA score was

5 / 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

10，Japan score was 64. It was meaning that UK and USA was
take care about working, but Japan was attention relationship.

2.3.5 Status orientation：UK score was 27，USA score was 0，Japan

score was 90. It was mean that Japan has a high power distance in
the company, but UK and USA was different Japan.

2.3.6 Profit orientation：UK score was 31，USA score was 11，Japan

score was 100. It was mean that Japan thought about company
benefit should be important everything. But UK and USA thought
about corporation image should be put in the first.

2.3.7 Ambiguity orientation: UK score was 32 ， USA score was 45,

Japan score was 100.It was mean that UK and USA was direct
express their mind but Japan was not. on the other hand, UK will
direct express their mind on the face, maybe it will make the
conflict with Japan, therefore we need pay attention this point and
let our partners will put their suggestion in the meeting or
negotiation. Because it will avoidance the conflict in the working.

2.3.8 Rule orientation: UK score was 40 ，USA score was 11，Japan

score was 58. it was mean that Japan was High-Uncertainty
Avoidance ， they favor to put a clearly plan to help them
development, and USA was Low-Uncertainty Avoidance, they
respect personal suggestion and working in low pressure, and UK
was like according rule to working.

2.3.9 Control orientation: UK score was 53，USA score was 0，Japan

score was 100. It was mean that Japan was take care the benefit in
the long-term cooperation, therefore, Japan was like to put a long
and clearly plan to help them to control the development
programs. But USA and UK was attention personal express in the
working.

6 / 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

2.3.10 Gender orientation: UK score was 32，USA score was 37，Japan

score was 0. These figures were not cross the 40, therefore they
have same methods to solve this problem.

2.3.11 Group orientation: UK score was 29，USA score was 8，Japan

score was 71. It was mean that Japan was favor working in the
group, but USA and UK was more individual, therefore they
would like working by personal.

This model talks about more clearly culture profiling between Japan, UK and USA.
Therefore we need give them some time to fit in this cooperation. By the way, we
need a correct method to improve the communication in this international cooperation
to win the international project, we will keep in the advantage location in the earlier
time compare our other competitors.

3.0 Recommendations
According these methods statement that the serious problem can’t ignore between
different cultural. These problems may be result in fail in this meeting. Therefore I
will put forward some suggestion for this meeting and development. They include 8
points to show that:

3.1 As the leader company. UK should be told that some rules about this
cooperation, it will avoidance some conflicts happen in the future.

7 / 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

Therefore, we hope that we can understand some behaviors and attitude in

this meeting.

3.2 We should make a clearly plan before this meeting for USA and Japan
have a good environment in this cooperation, and then, I suggestion we
should less the content and increase the opportunity for the negotiation in
this cooperation.

3.3 We should respect Japanese long-term cooperation and plan suggestions.

3.4 We need search some method which solves some conflict in this meeting,
if we don’t agree with Japanese suggestion; we should respect their
opinions and put forward our suggestion.

3.5 We should suggest our partners to change some knowledge order to

complement each other’s advantages. Therefore we should let UK and
USA make some short times plan and Japan will do some long term plan
for the company development.

3.6 We should let Japan understand our mind if Japan just consider company
benefit without social influence and corporate image.

3.7 We should do some better service to welcome our partners.

3.8 In the working time, we need take care about partners' employers, because
it will good for us setting up our international relationship in this
international cooperation

4.0 Conclusion
The different cultural became the inevitable problem, therefore our company should
make a perfect plan to improve our cooperation for this international team. According
analysis and compare different cultural, we need prepare some ways to avoidance
some problem happen in the future. but in first time, we need improve our behaviors
and attitude to face this cooperation, because we are the leader company, we need to

8 / 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

control the international cooperation development, in the same time we need increase
the content with our partners working, therefore we are have some core common
goals for this cooperation. As far as my point we should according really method to
share our information and technology to achieve the cooperation successful.

Finally I hope we can have a good and successful cooperation in this international
project.

9 / 10
Cross-cultural management:
Business report

References
1. Jerome D. Williams, Sang-Lin Han and William J. Qualls. (1998). A conceptual
Model and study of cross-culture Business relationship 135-143
2. Shuter, Robert. (2008). the centrality of culture. In Molefi Kete Asante,
Yoshitaka Miike, & Jing Yin (Eds.), the global intercultural communication
reader (pp. 37-43). New York: Routledge
3. Hofstede (1980), searching for the website:

www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_dimensions.php

10 / 10