1. Sherri Schulze
MANA 4348
Global Leadership
Fall 2015
Topic:
The Necessity of International Companies to Train
Managers who Lead Transnational Teams
(Using Hall and Trompenaars’ Research as Points of Reference)

2. In today’s business environment, as globalization finds its way into every part of
business development, international companies are finding it necessary to learn how to
manage transnational teams. While this sounds very simplistic on the surface, it can
determine a company’s success or failure and needs to be given considerable weight
when dealing across borders. In order to be effective, it is imperative international
companies understand the immense benefits from training international managers on how
different cultures affect attitudes and work ethic of the people they manage. What
motivates an employee in the West, might be considered unthinkable in the East. At the
foundation of learning is becoming familiar with the nuisances of different cultures and
understanding how these differences should be managed effectively in order to reach a
team’s greatest potential. Once this basic foundation is learned, not only will an
international manager become increasingly effective in managing transnational teams, but
the company will realize greater potential through the human asset of differing views
which can potentially open new doors to production and creativity. This paper intends to
give the international company a starting point to researching and learning how it can
engage its international managers in cultural learning. Although there has been
considerable research in the area of culture, in order to get a basic understanding of how
culture attitudes, norms, and values derive my primary focus will be on Hall’s High and
Low Context, and Trompenaars’ Seven Dimensions.
The first recommendation to be given is to the importance of international
companies to recognize the necessity of training managers on culture to build confidence
in their ability to lead transnational teams. Transnational teams are defined as individuals
from different cultures working together on activities that span national borders (Snell,
Snow, Davison, Hambrick, pg. 147). These teams are usually scattered around the globe
within a company, but can also be made up of company suppliers, vendors, and
employees that are outside of the company. Within most companies, human resource
professionals who are aware of the challenges associated with building transnational
teams implement the process of hiring employees within the company. Once a company
team’s mission and strategy have been outlined, HR will need to assemble the right
combination of individuals who can work together to meet company and team goals
(Snell, Snow, Davison, Hambrick, 1998). This can be extremely complicated especially
when hiring extends to outside of the company. When this is necessary, this is a good
time for an international manager to bring his expertise to the table so he can work with
HR to build the transnational team moving forward. By having access to a trained, well
informed international manager, HR will be much more successful with hiring and this in
turn will help reduce company costs in building teams.
By starting at the foundation of training managers for international management,
it is necessary to explore the meaning of the word culture. In the context of this paper,
country and individual cultures are the primary focus. Certainly culture is a very
important part of a company’s business, but it is not meant to be included in the subject
or part of the definition for this paper. Lane and Maznevski’s (2004) definition of culture
will be used. Culture is defined as “the set of assumptions and values that are shared by a
group of people and that guide that group of people’s interaction with each other. ...
These beliefs and values are taught to us so early and so unobtrusively that we are usually
unaware of their influence” (pg. 34). Culture provides a need for social identity within
groups. It also tells people within a shared culture what values are and are not

3. acceptable. It defines how people should act towards each other and sets apart what is
successful and what is not. Culture has a significant impact on teams and the workplace
in an international setting. Culture causes people to interpret things in different ways. It
has only been within recent years that differing cultures and employees’ perceptions has
come to light in the international business environment. Even as late as the 1960’s
cultural scientists believed that the Western way of management was ultimately the best,
and really only, way of managing people. Now, in 2015, managers are recognizing that
this is not necessarily the best way to conduct business. Companies are learning that in
order to be successful, they must not only adapt to the physical environments of other
countries in which they are doing business, but they must also adapt to the views of
participating employees as well (Trompenaars, 1994).
It is important that a company not assume a manager will know how to directly
deal with employees from another culture, just as an international manager should not
assume, without the proper education, s/he knows how to manage these employees. Lane
and Maznevski (2104) define assumption as an unquestioned, taken-for-granted belief
about the world and how it works (pg. 39). It is easy to make the assumption that you are
a good manager when you are very successful in a domestic environment. Why wouldn’t
this success translate into being just as effective in an international environment? The
answer is this: There are many reasons why. When engaging in business across borders
and employing teams to work together to achieve common goals, managers must be
cognizant of the many differences, not only in various countries, but in individual
cultures as well. The world is a complex place, but a manager can become extremely
successful if he has the right tools in his international toolbox.
If you want to understand culture, you must unpeel it layer by layer. In his book
Riding the Waves of Culture, Fons Trompenaars compares culture to layers of an onion.
He explains three layers: The Outer Layer, the Middle Layer, and the Core. These layers
are not independent of each other, but instead are complementary. The first layer, the
Outer Layer, is the layer that consists of explicit culture which is the deeper symbolic,
observable layers of culture (i.e., food, language, art, etc.). Trompenaars claims this layer
usually says more about who we are and where we come from than the culture or
community that we are judging. The second layer, the Middle Layer, requires an in-
depth look at cultural norms and values. Norms are what a group sees as right and wrong
and give us a feeling of ‘this is how I should behave’. Values define what a group sees as
good and bad. It is the concept that defines what is desirable and gives us a feeling of
‘this is how I aspire to behave’. Both norms and values help a culture form an informal
level of social control. The third layer, the Core, is where people act upon nature. Here
solutions to problems essentially disappear from our consciousness. These are things so
natural that we do not think about them; like concentrating on where we are going to get
our next breath of air -- we don’t think about it, we just do it. These ideas are at the very
bottom of the understanding culture’s foundation – the substrate if you will. Because
these are so innate, most people do not even realize they are there. This is why it is so
easy to assume everyone else does things like we do. But that is not true and this is the
first trap in which an international manager can find himself and is why this is one of the
most important steps. Anytime a manager walks into a meeting with a transnational
team, you must not make assumptions about anyone – not their tone of voice, not that
they are quiet, not that they agree with you. Once a manager recognizes this very

4. important first step, then s/he will find communication to be much more rewarding
because s/he will be prepared to recognize signals given by participants (Trompenaars,
1994).
Once the international manager becomes accustomed to not making assumptions,
the next step is to familiarize her/himself with cultural communication styles. Edward T.
Hall, in his book Beyond Culture, introduces the classification of high and low context in
cultures. Hall states, “The level of context determines everything about the nature of the
communication and is the foundation on which all subsequent behavior rests” (pg. 80).
He defines styles in communication as a speaker’s body language and who speaks before
whom, among other things. The nice thing about Hall’s research is that it tells which
country cultures are usually high context or low context. This makes it possible for the
international manager to walk into a meeting with an international team already prepared
to recognize these differences. For example, Japan has a very high context culture. What
this means is that a Japanese businessperson will act in certain ways that are customary in
this culture. Her/his communication style will be much more implicit and indirect, and
context will carry most of the meaning. S/he will expect others to know what is
bothering her/him so s/he will not have to be specific. In addition, in high context
cultures, people in places of authority are responsible for the actions of their
subordinates. The Japanese businessperson will expect to take time to get a job done
because building relationships with his team is a very important part of the process.
However, the low context individual, a businessperson from Germany, will demonstrate
explicit, direct communication patterns and will not rely on the context of the
communication. They are rule oriented and are task centered. They will want to get the
job done and do not want to waste time. It is easy to see with these two very simple
examples how conflict can possibly arise. If the international manager is able to easily
recognize these differences in communication, then s/he will be able to diffuse any
conflicts at this basic level before they happen (Hall, 1976).
To help further explain views of culture, Trompenaars builds on Parsons’ five
original relational orientations covering the ways humans deal with each other. These
orientations are: Universalism vs. particularism (rules versus relationships);
individualism vs. collectivism (the group versus the individual); neutral vs. emotional
(the range of feelings expressed); specific vs. diffuse (the range of involvement); and
achievement vs. ascription (how status is accorded). These five value orientations
influence the way people do business, as well as, manage others. Trompenaars then
builds upon these orientations by adding attitudes towards time, and attitudes towards the
environment. Universalist behavior is more abstract while particularist judgments focus
on present circumstances. Particularist groups seek gratification through relationships,
especially with their leader. This is much like the high context individual. The more a
particularist one is, the greater the commitment between employee and employer, and job
turnover is lower because of long-term commitments to the labor force. Universalists,
much like low context, focus more on rules than relationships while particularists focus
more on relationships than rules. With universalists, a deal is a deal, as opposed to a
particularist, where relationships evolve. It is customary to take time to get to know one
another in the particularist’s business world. This will be difficult for the get-down-to-
business universalist. When looking at universalism vs. particularism, we see significant

5. opposing characteristics. However, with individualism vs. collectivism the dimensions
are more complimentary than opposing. (Trompenaars, 1994)
Individualism is seen as a more recent ideology and is thought to have found its
start in Western modernized society during the Protestant Reformation. Collectivism is
believed to be the foundation of this category and has been around since the time when
humans worked together to achieve the common good of the group. One of the most
prominent differences is that individualists use the “I” form in speech when universalists
use “We”. However, what we see in this category is that individuals are either self-
oriented or collectively-oriented in that individuals identify themselves with their family,
their corporation, etc. Trompenaars states that negotiations, decision-making, and
motivation are the most critical business areas that fall within this category. When doing
business the individualist’s aim, much like low context, is to make a quick deal while the
collectivist’s aim is to build a lasting relationship. (Trompenaars, 1994)
When focusing on the last three of the five relational orientations, achievement vs.
ascription is probably the most important for the international manager in the business
environment. This orientation can lead to legal implications in the business world. Some
cultures do not respect women who work in business. Just because a woman is
successful in the United States or Great Britain, does not translate into ‘she is
knowledgeable’ in other cultures or that other cultures will accept and be willing to work
with her. In ascribing cultures, people receive status based on who they are inherently,
not based on their achievements. While it might be difficult for the achieving female
international manager to accept this, is important that she understand this very important,
critical issue. Trompenaars tells of a situation where a young aspiring British woman
accepted an assignment in Turkey. Unfortunately she did not do well because her
Turkish colleagues did not accept her. She was unable to command the local managers
effectively and became discouraged. Yes, it is illegal to discriminate in the United States;
however, it is not in some other cultures. If a female manager is working within these
types of cultures, according to Trompenaars, it is advisable she work with local seniority
to help get the job done. This type of cultural attitude could be opposed in meetings as
well and the female international manager will need to know these issues before walking
into a meeting blindly (Trompenaars, 1994).
Now that the different culture orientations have been discussed, it is important to
know the dimensions of the majority of businesspersons in the United States so the
international manager can use this key to unlock the next to the last step of building a
strong foundation. According to Hall’s high/low context, Americans are low-context
individualists who are ambitious, hardworking, competitive, confident, and direct. They
are more concerned with their personal success than the welfare of the group. They are
seen by most cultures as overly confident in that they attempt to impose their beliefs on
others and then fail to understand why their views are not accepted when encountering
resistance and resentment. American’s take a legalistic approach to business dealings
and expect everything to be in writing. They want things here and now. These
orientations correspond greatly to Trompenaars research as well. According to
Trompenaars, the United States ranks highly in the areas of universalism, individualism,
and achievement, is a little more specific than diffuse, and leans more towards affective
than neutral. Business persons in the United States tend to believe everyone should
follow set rules, but they focus on the individual as opposed to the group. For the

6. universalist dealing with the particularist, it is important to keep in mind that small talk to
the particularist is essential in business. It will help the universalist manager if s/he takes
some time to get to know the people on her/his transnational team on a more personal
level. For a manager in a leading position with his team, it is important to remember that
in many cultures a person’s title, age, and background connections are very important and
it will be helpful to respect the members of the team who are older, or have more tenure
than yourself. It is important to not show them up. (Hall, 1990, Garinger, 2012,
Trompenaars, 1994)
The final step for an international manager to accomplish her/his goal in
successfully managing a transnational team is to learn the cultural dimensions of the
members of her/his team. As is explained with the United States, Hall and Trompenaars’
research encompasses many other cultures including Japan, Germany, the Middle East
and many more. By researching and determining where a particular culture lies on the
scale, an international manager can equip her/himself with the tools necessary for leading
accomplished business team meetings. When an international manager has these keys to
unlocking understanding between cultures, he will be able to earn the trust of his
transnational team.
In today’s globalizing market economy, international companies can gain a
competitive business advantage through training of international managers to help with
business development. Transnational teams can help a company become hugely
successful in its business through cultural diversity. Because transnational teams include
employees from various backgrounds and cultures, they will offer an international
company varying perspectives that can help it meet global needs. Not only that, but
when an international company has locations in various parts of the world, these
employees can offer some of the best ideas and innovations from various departments
within the company. By recognizing this value, and training its managers to recognize
this human capital asset, s/he can build value throughout the company. In order to build
efficiency, a wise international manager will let employees contribute in their own way.
Differences are essential for building teams of people that deliver great results. A
developed international manager will appreciate and utilize the cultural diversity among
their team. S/he will encourage constructive conversations and take caution to allow
direct conflict. By recognizing and respecting cultural differences, the international
manager will be much better equipped to help facilitate communication among team
members who might not be aware that their culture directs others to do things in way
different from their own. By reducing, or even eliminating conflict and facilitating
communication, transnational teams will optimize their team’s performance that, in turn,
will optimize company performance.

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Geringer, Michael J., Michael S. Minor, and Jeanne M. McNett. "Sociocultural Forces." Global
Environment of Business. McGraw-Hill Education LLC, 2012. Print.
Hall, Edward T. Beyond Culture. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor, 1976. Print.
Hall, Edward T., and Mildred Reed Hall. Understanding Cultural Differences. Yarmouth, Me.:
Intercultural, 1990. Print.
Lane, Henry W., and Martha L. Maznevski. International Management Behavior. 7th ed. Southern Gate,
Chichester: United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons, 2014. Print.
Snell, Scott A., Charles C. Snow, Sue Canney Davison, and Donald C. Hambrick. “Designing and
Supporting Transnational Teams: The Human Resource Agenda.” Human Resource Management (1986-
1998) 37.2 (1998): 147. ProQuest. Web. 22 Sep. 2015.
Trompenaars, Alfons. Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Diversity in Global Business. Burr
Ridge, Ill.: Irwin Professional Pub., 1994. Print.
Trompenaars, Alfons, and Charles Turner. Riding the Waves of Innovation: Harness the Power of Global
Culture to Drive Creativity and Growth. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010. Print.