Abstract
The employee engagement problem is not limited to geographic boundaries; low employee engagement is pervasive among organizations around the world. Despite the ubiquitous nature of engagement, individuals’ reactions and responses are often bounded by their worldview and cultural background. These cultural differences have multiple dimensions, including uncertainty avoidance, power distance, and individualism. In this chapter, we evaluate the impact of these cultural differences by examining the results obtained in two very different cultures: Brazil and the United States.
Testing the model in distinct contexts allowed us to identify the impact of cultural differences. The results of our research did not support the expected differences between Brazil and the United Stated. However, these results provide evidence of the generalizability of our model.
References
- Alcadipani, R., & Caldas, M. P. (2012). Americanizing Brazilian management. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 8(1), 37–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gallup. (2013). State of the global market place: Employee engagement insights for business leaders worlwide.Google Scholar
- Hofstede, G. (1983). National cultures in four dimensions: A research-based theory of cultural differences among nations. International Studies of Management & Organization, 13(1), 46–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (Revised and expanded 2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- House, R., Rousseau, D. M., & Thomas- Hunt, M. (1995). The meso paradigm-a framework for the integration of micro and macro organizational-behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 17: 71–114.Google Scholar
- Islam, G. (2012). Between unity and diversity: Historical and cultural foundations of Brazilian management. European Journal of International Management, 6(3), 265–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4): 692–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mann, A., & Harter, J. (2016). The worldwide employee engagement crisis. Gallup Business Journal. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/188033/worldwide-employee-engagement-crisis.aspx
- Nascimento, A. M. (2010). Curso de direito processual do trabalho. Sao Paulo: Saraiva.Google Scholar
- O’Keefe, H., & O’Keefe, W. M. (2004). Business behaviors in Brazil and the USA: Understanding the gaps. International Journal of Social Economics, 31(5/6), 614–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Oldham, G. R., Hackman, J. R., & Pearce, J. L. (1976). Conditions under which employees respond positively to enriched work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61(4), 395–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pratt, M., & Ashforth, B. (2003). Fostering meaningfulness in working and at work, in K. Cameron, & J. Dutton (Eds.) Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline, pp. 309–327. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
- Shuck, B., & Rose, K. (2013). Reframing employee engagement within the context of meaning and purpose: Implications for HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 15(4), 341–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sledge, S., Miles, A. K., & Coppage, S. (2008). What role does culture play? A look at motivation and job satisfaction among hotel workers in Brazil. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(9), 1667–1682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Stück, J., & LeClere, M. J. (2014). The Brasileiro and the Yankee: A cross-cultural comparison of Brazilian and American managers in Brazil. The Exchange, 3(1).Google Scholar
- Wood, T., & Caldas, M. P. (2002). Adopting imported managerial expertise in developing countries: The Brazilian experience. The Academy of Management Executive, 16(2), 18–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lenartowicz, T. (2011). Measuring Hofstede’s five dimensions of cultural values at the individual level: Development and validation of CVSCALE. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23(3–4): 193–210.Google Scholar