An overview: Human Resources and

managing people in different kinds of

cultures.

By Fernando Lanzer and Huib Wursten

The Human Resources function in any organization is responsible for ensuring that there are qualified and motivated people capable of working towards achieving the organization’s purpose. In order to fulfill that responsibility, HR is also a quality control function, looking after the quality of the people in the institution in terms of capabilities and motivation. Yet, the HR function does not manage the people in the company; the line managers (and support function managers) are the ones responsible for managing the people reporting to them respectively, according to a defined structure.

In other words: the role of the Human Resources function is to help managers so that they can manage people (more) effectively.

This sounds simple and straightforward enough, but there are countless misconceptions and doubts about the role of HR, going across all cultures and influenced by the Seven Worldviews, among other things.

The role of HR should NOT be to usurp the role of line managers and take over the management of teams and people. And therein lies the challenge, both for HR professionals and for line managers: how to manage people effectively without handing over the people-management role to HR, since it is the line manager’s primary responsibility to manage people.

What often happens, in practice, in different cultures

Contest: The division of roles between Managers and HR in Contest companies is generally defined by their respective accountabilities: Managers are primarily accountable for overseeing their teams’ day-to-day operations, while HR focuses on broader organizational issues related to people management, policy, and compliance. 

In Contest cultures, the attitude represented by line managers saying to HR, ” You take care of the people, while I take care of the business,” is quite widespread. It has also been propagated widely in popular culture through cinema and television, where situations abound where whenever staff members misbehave in any way, they are sent to HR to be disciplined.

It’s interesting to see that in these cultures, the line managers seem to delegate all disciplinary actions to the Human Resources Department. Apparently, Line managers in Contest cultures don’t want anything to do with managing people other than telling them what to do, and if people do not obey, they should talk to HR. In the eyes of non-contest cultures, this looks like a pupil is being sent to the principal’s office to be disciplined, or the stereotypical mother is saying to her child, “Talk to your father” whenever the child misbehaves rather than facing the situation.

We do know that there are a few organizations in which line managers actually manage their teams, but in Contest cultures they seem to be the exception, not the rule. Unfortunately, this behavioris promoted internationally by films and TV shows created in America and the UK, which dominate the global market. In most fiction stories generated in Contest cultures, HR is seen managing the people, while line managers focus on other management tasks.

From a manager’s perspective, firing people who are not performing is something simple and easy to do. Some managers delegate the task of communicating severance to the HR function, while others prefer to do it themselves (sometimes because in Contest cultures it can feel very empowering to shout “you’re fired” at someone and see that person leave the workplace by the end of the day).

 Contest culture labor markets are typically very dynamic: since these cultures are also short-term oriented, in combination with the emphasis on performance, confrontation, and a bias for action, the resulting outcome is that people change jobs more frequently. The firing and hiring processes are both rather quick, so change happens faster.

What will get you fired in Contest cultures? Frequent reasons are confrontations with your direct boss, typically involving poor performance or diverging interpretations about your degree of autonomy in carrying out your work. Many people leave their jobs for similar reasons, basically because it is reasonably easy to find another job in dynamic markets. Competition among employers is also fierce, so, often people leave their jobs to work for a competitor that pays more.

If you want to get a promotion or a salary increase, take initiative; making sure these will not put your boss in an embarrassing position but rather will make them shine as well. Keep your eyes on “the bottom line,” your final results and your targets; achieving targets will get you the recognition you aspire to.

In Well-oiled Machine (WOM) cultures emphasis is placed on detailed planning and strict discipline in following plans and structures. Managing people is not delegated to HR as much as it is in Contest cultures: managers manage their teams and HR are called upon eventually as “people specialists” when it comes to planning and designing policies and tools. Applying these in daily practice is regarded as a manager’s job.

Firing people in WOM cultures is not as easy as in Contest cultures; the underlying concept is that severance is a disturbance in the desired order of things, and this disturbance creates other problems to solve. Therefore, firing requires following a structured process including good reasons and complying with a series of pre-determined conditions. If managers do follow due process, they will be able to fire staff members who did not perform or behaved in ways regarded as unacceptable.

Staff members who repeatedly fail to comply with the rules or with clear instructions will get fired. Unlike Contest cultures, it will not typically happen quickly and the person who has been fired will not be required to leave the job immediately. The processes of firing and hiring are more structured and take more time to be carried out, so the labor market is less dynamic. Also, high Uncertainty Avoidance in WOM cultures plays a role: people have less appetite for risk, and this drives changes to happen with caution and more slowly.

If one wants to progress in their career, the keys to that involve accumulating expertise, specializing, aiming for excellence, developing strict self-discipline and complying with norms at all times. Do not expect dramatic recognition, though. Rather, recognition will take the form of prestige and some financial rewards, but not as blatant as one might typically see in Contest cultures. Excelling in WOM cultures is seen as a duty that deserves recognition but not necessarily big celebrations; after all, people are just doing what they should. 

The role of HR is to ensure that the proper planning, work distribution, and structures are in place, so that people can easily fulfill their duties. Ethics is not usually a problem, since compliance is clearly outlined and followed. Fawlty planning is most often regarded as the root cause of people problems. When ethics issues are identified, they are typically treated with severe punishments and public shaming.

In Network cultures managers play more of a team coordinator role, since hierarchies are minimized as much as possible. HR restricts itself most often to administrative roles that do not have great influence on the way staff are managed by line managers. There is little, if any, delegation of people issues to be managed by HR. Rather, line managers manage their staff much as they would coordinate their own colleagues in group study teams at school. Performance issues may often be addressed as a team issue by the whole team, rather than through a one-on-one conversation between manager and staff member.

There is such an emphasis on autonomy that everyone enjoys pretending hierarchy does not (or barely) exist. Bosses strive to be treated as part of the team, though they expect that staff members will acknowledge their position as “primus inter pares”, the first among peers. 

HR plays the role of “place holder” in charge of coordinating discussions about people management. They act mostly as secretaries of people management committees that discuss extensively how to plan, design and apply policies in a way that ensures all stakeholders are satisfied with the outcomes. When specific issues arise, they are handled by the line manager/coordinator with the team.

In hiring procedures HR acts as a process coordinator, in which many managers interview several candidates and then seek consensus about whom to hire. This is typical of Network cultures: decisions are made by individuals in groups (with minimal hierarchy) seeking consensus.

Since performance is not such a core issue, it is quite difficult to manage underperformers and virtually impossible to fire them. People often mention that this is due to a very protective labor legislation, but the truth is that the underlying values of Network cultures play more of a role than the legal framework. Legislation, of course, mirrors a culture’s values in every culture. 

With regards to severance, the main issue is simply that Network cultures are basically very inclusive societies that value caring and quality of life over performance. This translates into practice as a reluctance to exclude anyone from the organization, unless there is a critical incident that clearly justifies dismissal, such as stealing or blatantly harassing someone.

Critical thinking is valued in Network cultures; so, asking smart questions will get you a lot of respect and (non-financial) recognition. Voicing your opinions assertively will also help you progress in your career, as long as it is done with respect and composure.

In Pyramid cultures it’s a quite different story, largely because of high Power Distance, Collectivism, and high Uncertainty Avoidance. The combination of these value-dimensions results in a very different culture environment for managing people at work and for the role of the Human Resources function in organizations.

For starters, setting goals, targets and expectations is a very hierarchical, top-down exercise. And yet, performance is not the main concern in such cultures, even in those with a higher score in in the MAS dimension; it is relationships and loyalty that determine how successful someone typically is. In Pyramid cultures loyalty to your boss is the most critical factor to success at work. Therefore, job descriptions and targets are not as important as the relationships one maintains with their bosses.

Hiring is often a very personal process, in the sense that a team leader might hire someone they know, with little or no involvement from HR. If candidates are presented that do not have a pre-existing relationship with the team leader, hiring decisions are based on whether there is an initial positive impression based on personal chemistry.

Firing can happen suddenly, like in Contest cultures, and usually happens when mutual trust is broken, in very subjective terms. It doesn’t happen as quickly as in Contest cultures, in terms of leaving the office by sunset, but typically people are asked to leave in a few days. Labor legislation can affect the process, and it can be quite different from one Pyramid culture to another, but it usually boils down to how much money someone is entitled to when they are fired.

What will get you fired, of course, is doing anything that is perceived as being disloyal to your direct boss or to the organization as a whole. This can be very subjective. Although labor legislation can be protective in terms of requiring significant indemnities to be paid out to staff upon dismissal (making severance expensive), there is usually the legal concept of “loss of trust by the employer” which can be used as a reason for dismissal. In most Pyramid cultures, as long as the employer pays out, anybody can be dismissed without an argument.

Success awaits those who develop strong relationships with bosses and peers, and who show loyalty to the organization. If there is also good performance, all the better.

In Solar System cultures the characteristic tension between high Power Distance (PDI) and high Individualism (IDV), translated as respect for hierarchy while valuing autonomy and employee rights, makes scenarios a bit more complex also at work and in regard to the role of the HR function in people management.

Managing people is typically shared between line managers and the HR function. Since there is a lot of power games and jockeying for positions in organizations, HR is typically happy to take on board certain people management responsibilities, in order to affirm its own power within the musical chairs games.

Firing staff members is not so simple and easy. Solar System cultures typically have protective labor legislation in place that demand a very well-documented, bureaucratic, procedure to allow for dismissal. In practice, dismissals are rare and easily become litigious when they happen, making them a long, drawn-out process typically involving labor unions as well.

Underperformers can frequently get away with doing the bare minimum so as to avoid severance, and since achievement is not so strongly valued in Solar System cultures, what might eventually trigger dismissal is somewhat serious unethical behavior. Sexual or moral harassment is seldom raised as grounds for dismissal, since in these cultures there is far more tolerance for behaviors that would be regarded as unacceptable in Contest cultures, by comparison.

In order to succeed, one needs to learn how to “play the system”: this includes knowing when to challenge and when to concede. Mastering the conceptual knowledge that underpins “the system” will be very useful to win arguments in specific situations.

In Family cultures the workplace atmosphere and the role of HR tend to be quite similar to what is observed in Pyramid cultures. Hierarchy (high PDI) and Collectivism (low IDV) translate into very top-down management styles, and relationship-based work cultures. The main differences relate to the lower scores on Uncertainty Avoidance; this results in a less structured work environment and more flexibility in general.

Hirings often happen through a network of relationships: someone in the organization recommends a relative or friend as a job candidate. Some companies rely almost exclusively on this process to hire new members of staff.

HR plays a role of “trusted advisor” to Top Management, and in these cultures, this is a more personalized relationship between the specific people involved. Compared to Social Pyramid cultures, everything is a bit less formal and structured. The Head of HR might have no specific technical knowledge but holds the position because of a long-lasting trust relationship with one of the Top Managers.

Line managers typically enjoy the “more pleasant” aspects of dealing with their staff members: telling them what to do, sending them to training courses in nice locations, promoting them and awarding bonuses. They tend to delegate to HR the less pleasant tasks: firing people, disciplining them, communicating that their bonus will be lower this year, communicating that they did not get the promotion they wanted. Staff members may grumble, but they rarely challenge “bad news”, because high PDI drives great respect for hierarchy.

It is relatively easy to fire people and that usually happens whenever trust is broken. Depending on how emotional the triggering situation is, people might be asked to leave the premises immediately, or in a few days. Performance is not typically the issue, but loyalty is.

In order to be successful, one must invest in long-term relationships with people at the top and demonstrate loyalty and dedication to the institution.

Last, but not least, Japan has its own workplace culture characteristics that reflect its national culture values.

Workplaces are highly structured environments dominated by intense dedication, high Uncertainty Avoidance (translated as rituals and strict procedures for everything) and very high MAS (translated as strong valuation of achievement over quality of life and caring).

HR plays the role of being a cog in the wheel. It enforces the policies and procedures, but seldom needs to intervene, since most workers at all levels observe procedures quite strictly.

Hiring observes specific protocols involving  HR and line managers; decisions are made by seeking consensus at a certain level and asking for confirmation by a next higher level manager. HR acts as a secretary to ensure due process is followed.

Quality improvement has become a trademark issue in Japanese business culture. These processes have flourished in Japan precisely because its national culture treasures self-discipline, performance and dedication to continuous improvement. Other countries have tried to copy these quality control processes, but they have not been able to be as successful as Japan, simply because other national cultures do not have the same combination of cultural values that is unique to Japanese culture: strong valuation of performance, Collectivism facilitating teamwork, high Uncertainty Avoidance driving rigorous discipline, respect for hierarchy (high IDV) and a willingness to make short-term sacrifices to obtain long-term constant improvements (driven by high LTO scores).

In spite of the very demanding work environment, severance does not happen easily or very often. There is an emphasis on long-term employment and stability on the job is one of its consequences.

What will get you fired is not necessarily underperformance, but rather shortcomings in loyalty to the firm and, of course, a significant incident in ethics. There is, in all these issues, a somewhat significant tolerance in terms of actual severance; staff members may be severely punished and even publicly shamed, but dismissal and exclusion from the staff group is seen as a last resort.

In order to succeed, showing loyalty is a pre-requisite; and also showing dedication and compliance, working long hours and making personal sacrifices to benefit the institution. Perseverance and resilience are key competencies for success.