Differences in motivational patterns of UK and Russian employees
One of the most critical examination of the meaning and usages or applications of management in the modern employment world would appear to be synonymous with observational postulates formulated by Geert Hofstede. In most of analytical works by Hofstede, there is a clear and deliberate element of comparing various cultural environments with regard to employee motivation and commitment factors. In one of these similar works, there is a general comparison of cultural environments across the major world economic backgrounds to assess the impact of cultural orientation on employment (Hofstede, 1993). In a quick assessment, the author’s work can be said to feature comparative management in the various employment environments due to diversity issues that the cultural surroundings within which the employment exists. Interestingly, the basic observation is that management practices can be traced back from the United States and their dispersal from the US cultural environment can be transcribed on the various cultures across the world for comparison.
Employee motivation is largely a factor of the actual working environment and effective vulture that the labour industry in a country is established on. Motivation at the workplace is a close manifestation of the growth prospects that the employees aspire to achieve, particularly within the constraints of the cultural practices facilitated by the general procedures and routines that the society has evolved to accommodate. However, within the larger picture of historical developments inspired by the social and economic times of the society, these practices are deemed to change (Hofstede, 1994). Political factors play a vital role in the evolution of the effective environment that the society can boast of in terms of economic system interpretation of employment and labour regulations. For instance, the liberal market in the UK and the US have a balance of every market including the labour market which introduces very potent forces of negotiation for the best employment experience hence motivation thereon. This is the cultural perspective that can also be expected in the Russian system which is perhaps influenced by the cultural and political forces that its economic orientation with communism features.
2. a) Literature Review
Comparing the congruency in the United Kingdom as well as the Russian employment environment can best be approached by assessing the cultural standards depicted by the two societies. Using the postulates described by Hofstede (1993), diversity issues in the two environments is expected from the onset due to the economic cultures that these two economies have been established from a historical context. Similar sentiments are delivered in a paper prepared by the same author (Hofstede, 1994), to the effect that the diverse human resource management issues expected can be traced from major cultural experiences that different countries have.
b) Research Questions
From the realization of the impact made by a particular cultural background to the employment experience in a country, several research questions were formulated to assist in performing the appropriate research. Most importantly, the economic environment within which the employment experience is established in must be brought out to clearly address the most pressing missing research links. Alternatively, the basic orientation to international labour regulations as a standard of measure for the relevant employment experience issues must also be depicted in the research development. Using these insights to formulate the necessary research links, the following research questions were used in the research to determine the differences in motivational patterns regarding employment in the UK and Russia.
Motivation falls under human resource management, to what extent is HRM established in the UK’s and the Russian labour market?
Motivation as a principle of HRM has its roots in the US as a cultural invention at the workplace; how congruent are the cultural environments in the UK and Russia with the US setting?
Motivation is a factor of several influences inherent in a particular economic establishment; how does capitalism and communism in the UK and Russia affect the employment experience in terms of motivation in the two countries?
Human resource is affected by the three tenets of the human society that include political setting as well; how is the political system in the UK and Russia affect employment experience and motivation?
3. Research design
Research was conducted from the cultural perspective of employment within different settings offered by various countries. Perhaps the most important approach was from the realization that human resource management plays an important role in the definition of the employment setting that a country offers. Application of the basic management practices in the UK is closely similar to the American model due to the apparent liberal business culture that has evolved over the years in the two countries. Employment evolution in the UK as inspired by major occurrences in trade union movements in the history of the country can be said to be very strong factors shaping up the modern day employment experience in the UK just as it does in the USA (Hofstede, 1998). Cultural orientation of the two countries can be extrapolated to manifest the resemblance of employment relations in the two countries. However, some economic differences play a major role in the management at the helm of employees’ relations between different countries as well. Placing the Russian context in the equation introduces a different perspective that is quite different from the American experience.
Using such an introductory perspective, the appropriate research to unravel the missing links was conducted using an analysis of the various socioeconomic and political features that each country has regarding employment. After the identification of the actual interactions that each of the above areas have with regard to employment and possible impact on motivation, the settings offered by both the UK and Russia were assessed to create a more specific approach. The research design emphasised on the importance of management insights for the employment experience issues for the appropriate theoretical explanation. From the design, data collection was then employed for the two countries’ settings.
4. Data Collection
The main data collection involved two approaches that targeted the country system as well as the industry specific approach. On one hand, the analysis on the entire country system was performed from the general data of the socioeconomic and political setting that could have a bearing on employment experience in the two countries. Data collection used general information existing on cultural environment depicted in the two countries. On the other hand, industry specific assessment was performed by involving a closed ended questionnaire interrogating employees in the two countries. The questionnaire is contained as Appendix 1 at the end of this paper.
Hofstede, G., (1993) “Cultural Constraints in Management Theories,” Academy of Management Executive, 7(1):81-94
Hofstede, G., (1994) “Cultural Constraints in Management Theories,” International Review of Strategic Management, 5:27-48
Hofstede, G., (1998) “Think Locally, Act Globally: Cultural Constraints in Personnel Management,” Management International Review, 7-26.
This questionnaire has been developed to compare and contrast differences in motivational patterns of UK and Russian employees. There is no need to state your name anywhere on this questionnaire due to it being confidential and anonymous.
How many people work in your organisation:
Manufacturing; Tourism; Retail; Healthcare; Education; Financial Services; FashionYour wage per months:
For Russia (Roubles):1000-1000010000-5000050000-15000015000+
For UK (Pounds):100-10001000-30003000-50005000-15000
1-2 years3-5 years6-10 years11-15 years16 years+
How important for you is financial reward? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important)
How important for you is interesting work? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important)
How important for you are fringe benefits? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important)
How important for you is company’s ethical stand? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important)
How important for you is financial teamwork? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important)
How important for you is prospects of being promoted? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important)
How important for you are bonuses available? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important)
How important for you is stability of your company? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important)
How important for you is recognition? (1-5; 1-not important; 5- very important)