Advertisement

Management International Review

, Volume 52, Issue 5, pp 619–642 | Cite as

The Diorama

The Impact of Gender and Ethnic ‘Native Categories’ on Cross-Cultural Management in a Post-Acquisition Automobile Manufacturer
  • Fiona Moore
Research Article

Abstract

  • This paper uses an incident in which a diorama was set up at the entrance to the Final Assembly section of the BMW MINI plant near Oxford to anlayse the impact of gender and ethnic identities on cross-cultural management, through the anthropological concept of the ‘native category’. Its aims are to explore the ways in which the diorama symbolically exposed tensions in the workplace relating to ethnicity and gender; to consider the role of a German dominance effect on the workforce; and to examine the implications of these for cross-cultural management.

  • The data was gathered through participant-observation on the assembly line and managers’ offices, and through both unstructured and semi-structured interviews with managers and workers, during two fieldwork periods, the first in 2003 and the second involving intermittent visits from 2003–2006.

  • The paper explores the ways in which the diorama reflected and contributed to unspoken tensions within the workplace relating to ethnicity and gender, and assesses the role of the German dominance effect on the workforce. It investigates the impact of tacit discourses on organisations, and considers ways in which cross-cultural management activities can be successfully carried out in MNCs.

  • The management of gender and ethnicity within BMW were affected by the ‘native categories’ of British and German managers and workers; furthermore, taking a native categories approach to cross-cultural management reveals areas of friction, and sheds light on normally-overlooked problems in merged organisations.

Keywords

Ethnicity Gender Dominance effect Native categories Micropolitics Manager-worker relations 

References

  1. Barley, S. R. (1983). Semiotics and the study of organizational cultures.Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 393–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brannen, M. Y. (2009). Culture in context: New theorizing for today’s complex cultural organizations. In Nakata, C. (Ed.)Beyond hofstede: Culture frameworks for global marketing and management (pp. 81–100). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  3. Briggs, C. L. (1986).Learning how to ask: A sociolinguistic appraisal of the role of the interview in social science research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buckley, P. J., & Chapman, M. (1997). The use of native categories in management research.British Journal of Management, 8(4), 283–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang, J. (1991).Wild swans: Three daughters of China. London: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  6. Chapman, M. (1997). Preface: Social anthropology, business studies and cultural issues.International Studies of Management and Organization, 26(4), 3–29.Google Scholar
  7. Davison, E. D., & Punnett, B. J. (1995). International assignments: Is there a role for gender and race in decisions?International Journal of Human Resource Management, 6(2), 412–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Durkheim, E., & Mauss, M. (1967 [1903])Primitive classification. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. Ebster-Grosz, D., & Pugh, D. (1996).Anglo-German business collaboration: Pitfalls and potentials. London: MacMillan Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ferner, A., & Quintanilla, J. (1998). Multinationals, national identity, and the management of HRM: ‘Anglo-Saxonisation’ and its limits.International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9, 710–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fox, K. (2005).Watching the English: The hidden rules of social behaviour. London: Hodder and Stougton.Google Scholar
  12. Globokar, T. (1997). Eastern Europe meets West: An empirical study on French management in a Slovenian plant. In Sackmann, S. (Ed.),Cultural complexitiy in organizations. Inherent contrasts and contradictions (pp. 72–86). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Gluckman, M. (1958).Analysis of a social situation in modern Zululand. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Gluckman, M. (Ed.). (1964).Closed systems and open minds: The limits of naivety in anthropology. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  15. Harris, S. (2000). Reconciling positive and interpretative international management research: A native category approach.International Business Review, 9(6), 755–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hebert, L., Very, P., & Beamish, P. (2005). Expatriation as a bridge over troubled water: A knowledge-based perspective applied to cross-border acquisitions.Organization Studies, 26(10), 1455–1476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hertz, R. (1973 [1909]) The pre-eminence of the right hand: A study in religious polarity. In Needham, R. (Ed.),Right and left: Essays in dual symbolic classification (pp. 3–31). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hickson, D. J., & Pugh, D. S. (1997).Management worldwide: The impact of societal culture on organizations around the globe. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  19. Hodson, R. (1998). Organizational ethnographies: An underutilized resource in the sociology of work.Social Forces, 76(4), 173–208.Google Scholar
  20. Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action.Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Koopmans, R., & Statham, P. (1999). Challenging the liberal nation-state? Postnationalism, multiculturalism, and the collective claims making of migrants and ethnic minorities in Britain and Germany.The American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 652–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Levi-Strauss, C. (1962).Le totemisme aujourd’hui. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  23. Levi-Strauss, C. (1963). The bear and the barber.Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 93(1), 1–11.Google Scholar
  24. van Maanen, J. (1979). The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography.Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 539–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Manning, P. K. (1979). Metaphors of the field: Varieties of organizational discourse.Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 660–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McSweeney, B. (2009). Incoherent culture.European Journal of Cross-Cultural Competence and Management, 1(1), 22–25.Google Scholar
  27. Mintzberg, H. (1979). An emerging strategy of ‘direct’ research.Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 582–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Morgan, G. (1998).Images of organization. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Morosini, P., Shane, S., & Singh, H. (1998). National cultural distance and cross-border acquisition performance.Journal of International Business Studies, 29(1), 137–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Neate, P. (2003).Where you’re at: Notes from the frontline of a hip-hop planet. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  31. Needham, R. (1967).Introduction to E. Durkheim and M. Mauss, Primitive Classification. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Needham, R. (1973). Introduction. In Needham, R. (Ed.),Right and left: Essays in dual symbolic classification (pp. i–xxxvii). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  33. Newbigging, C., Shatford, S., & Williams, T. (1998).The changing faces of cowley works. Witney: Robert Boyd Publications.Google Scholar
  34. Piekkari, R., & Welch, C. (2011). Pluralism in international business and international management research: Making the case. In R. Piekkari & C. Welch (Eds.),Rethinking the case study in international business and management research. London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  35. Piekkari, R., Welch, C., & Paavilainen, E. (2009). The case study as disciplinary convention: Evidence from international business journals.Organisational Research Methods, 12(3), 567–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ramsden, J. (2006).Don’t mention the war: The British and the Germans since 1890. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
  37. Riad, S. (2005). The power of ‘organizational culture’ as a discursive formation in merger integration.Organization Studies, 26(10), 1529–1554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rohlen, T. P. (1979).For harmony and strength: Japanese white-collar organization in anthropological perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  39. Sackmann, S. A., & Phillips, M. E. (2004). Contextual influences on culture research: Shifting assumptions for new workplace realities.International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 4(3), 370–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sanday, P. R. (1979). The ethnographic paradigm(s).Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 527–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sanyal, R., Napier, N. K., & Smith, B. (2007). The parting gift.Thunderbird International Business Review, 49(5), 619–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Scarbrough, H., & Terry, M. (1996).Industrial relations and the reorganization of production in the UK motor vehicle industry: A study of the Rover Group. Warwick Papers in Industrial Relations No. 58. Coventry: University of Warwick.Google Scholar
  43. Sharpe, D. (2006). Shop floor practices under changing forms of managerial control: A comparative ethnographic study of micro-politics, control and resistance within a Japanese multinational. Journal of International Management, 12(3), 318–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Smith, C., & Meiksins, P. (1995). System, society and dominance effects in cross-national organizational analysis.Work, Employment and Society, 9(2), 241–267.Google Scholar
  45. Sperber, D. (1974).Rethinking symbolism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Strecker, I. (1988).The social practice of symbolization: An anthropological analysis. London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  47. Ward, S., Stuart, O., & Swingedouw, E. (1993). Cowley in the Oxford economy. In T. Hayter & D. Harvey (Eds.),The factory and the city: The story of the cowley automobile workers in Oxford (pp. 67–92). London: Mansell.Google Scholar
  48. Waters, C. (1997). ‘Dark strangers’ in our midst: Discourses of race and nation in Britain 1947–1963.The Journal of British Studies, 36(2), 207–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Westwood, S. (1984).All day, every day: Factory and the family in the making of women’s lives. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  50. Whisler, T. R. (1999).The British motor industry, 1945–94: A study in industrial decline. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Yee, C. (2003 [1943]).The silent traveller in Oxford. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Gabler Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementRoyal Holloway, University of LondonEghamSurrey

Personalised recommendations