Management Styles Analysis

Management Styles Management is a far-running subject and there are many definitions of management. From my point of view, management is described as a process to get something done in the business environment. It is the person called Manager who gets various jobs done by assign works to people working with him/her. How the Manager can get the things done effectively and efficiently is an important problem that should be researched. Robert Tannenbaum and Warren H.

Schmidt (1958, 1973), who argued that the style of leadership is dependent upon the prevailing circumstance, therefore leaders should exercise a range of management styles and deploy them as appropriate. In fact, a management style is an overall method of leadership used by a manager. Managers should be able to understand the concept of management styles which are characteristic ways relating to subordinates in different situations. In this essay, management styles and how they demonstrated in different cultures will be addressed.

Also, the factors that affect the formation of such characteristic management styles will also be discussed. The aim of this essay is to provide some suggestions for managers in international companies with regard to the area of management in a foreign culture background.

There are two sharply contrasting styles: Autocratic and Permissive. Furthermore, these two categories are broken down into smaller subsets, which I will not discuss in detail in this essay. Each of the two styles has its own characteristics. Autocratic” means that Manager makes all decisions unilaterally, while “Permissive” means Manager permits subordinates to take part in decision making and also managers prefer to gives subordinates a considerable degree of autonomy in completing routine work activities. Although it may sound better to conduct a permissive manage style which might stimulate the employees to engage more into their job since they are also invited to take certain responsibility of the company’s fate.

However, that’s not always the case.

Therefore, in the fast development of economic globalization, how to properly utilize these different management styles according to local situations is a hot topic. Due to the various custom and belief in specific backgrounds, different management styles are required in different parts of the world. In my opinion, there are three key factors that influence management styles: culture, policy, and custom. How they affect the management styles are illustrated in this paragraph.

First of all, culture shapes both the individual and collective behavior in a society. Therefore, there is no doubt that management is closely associated with culture.

The management style and culture is closely related to each other. Diversity of cultures determines diversity of management. There are different cultures in different countries, different nationalities, and different societies, which means that there must be different management styles in order to deal with such specific situations. For instance, the two typical different management styles in Japan and the US both built on national cultures.

Then, management is also a culture itself. The leading ideologies, management theories and management styles are all important parts of the enterprise culture.

Management style varies from cultures. Therefore, it is crucial to study culture first and thereby decide which management style is suitable. Then, different policies and social rules are the other important factors which influence that influences management styles.

Economy cannot avoid laws, since any business operations in a country must obey the different policies announced by different countries. Different countries have different law systems and social rules and no matter what management styles should observe the law and rules. Only within the legal framework can a management style be applied.

In a word, law system directly influences management styles. For instance, managers can encourage his staffs to work overtime in some countries but it violates the labor law in some other countries. Apart from culture and law, different business customs also can influence management styles.

Business custom is part of a nation’s culture. It has been formed in a long time, maybe several decades, several countries, or even thousands years such as China and Japan. The custom includes how to manage enterprise, how to treat customers, how to get along with leaders and subordinates.

Different countries and economic systems have different answers and standards. For example, in China, “face issue” is important for individuals in traditional custom. And appreciation or encouragements should be made before any criticism.

If managers point out employees’ mistake in front of other workers directly, the employee might feel ashamed and reluctant to cooperate with the manager in future, which surely will bring barriers to management. There are also various customs in different regions, management styles are also changing according to such differences.

I would like to take Japan and the US as examples to discuss how these key factors, culture, policy, and customs influence management styles in specific circumstances. Obviously, Japan and the US display an obvious contrast in the aspect of culture, society and ideology, etc. I would like to discuss the features of Japan and the US at first.

First of all, the US is a nation with a large number of immigrants, which determines that its national culture is identified with individualism. As is known to all, the US is country with great freedom.

The enterprise culture in the US also grasps the core content of such freedom for individual employee. Certainly, this individualism is rather than selfishness, but emphasis on the independence, motility and personal achievement. As a result, the management in the US also encourages individualism and free development of personality.

They pay more attention to the efficiency of organization and production. They focus less on personal behaviors than what Japanese companies do. For example, employees in the US always prefer companies which give them certain personal time and space.

This trend also regulates the management styles to permissive. On the other hand, Japan is a very densely populated homogeneous country.

Their society is stable and uniform, so that Japan has a strong similarity in their behaviors. Japan, as an emerging capitalist country, it has much feudalistic remnants in enterprise culture and management. Because of paternalism in Japan, they respect authority and mastery. They accept hierarchical system and absolutely comply with the leaders and authorities. Then they have a form of familial capitalism.

In the company there is a dependence relation among the people according to how long they have been in the company.

There is a clear-cut personal relationship which is “Sennpai” and “Kouahai” (Senior and Junior). “Sennpai” should help, cultivate and responsible for “Kouahai” and “Kouahai” should respect “Sennpai” unconditionally. Most important, they value collectivism rather than individualism. They emphasize a sense of belonging to the team and loyal to enterprise. As the discussion above, management styles must be suitable for the place where the management is taking place.

Like, these two countries with distinctive cultural and social background, Japan and the US have quite different management styles.

In other words, enterprises want to explore oversea business, they should take different management styles in order to get most effective management. Apparently, autocratic management styles are suitable for regions where people respect collective value more, like the situation in Japan. In this management style, Manager can make decisions unilaterally and effectively without wasting time for a democratic decision.

This style can ensure a prompt decision thus master the business opportunities speedily and improve efficiency. Then while permissive should be more effective for the enterprises in the US, since the employees pay more attention to their individual value.

The manager should allow the employees to take part in decision-making: therefore everything is agreed by the majority and everyone can work with responsibility. In summary, management styles not only clearly exist in different regions of the world, it should arouse the special attention of managers and all the enterprises.

Meanwhile there is no management that remains unchanged for an international enterprise because they are running business in different cultures of the world. Management styles should be adjusted with the changing of the cultural background, specific law systems and traditional customs. Reference Abbott, Keith (2006), The impact of management style on the employment relations of different sized organizations, Australasian journal of business and social inquiry, vol. 4, no.

2, pp. 1-20 Deaton, D. (1985). Management style and large-scale survey evidence.

Industrial Relations Journal, 16, 2, 67–71. Edwards, 1993 P.

Edwards, A. Ferner and K. Sisson, People and the Process of management in the multinational company: A review with some illustrations, Industrial Relations Research Unit, Coventry (1993). Purcell, 1987 J. Purcell, Mapping management styles in employment relations.

Journal of Management Studies,  24 5 (1987), pp. 533–548. Wolf D. Reitsperger. (2007).

‘Japanese Management: Coping with British Industrial Relations’. Journal of Management Studies. : Wiley.