Question 1

A decade ago, Gregersen et al. (1997) researched Fortune 500 companies, and they discovered that 85
percent of them didn't have an adequate number of capable global leaders. Moreover, only 30 percent of
them were rated as having the necessary competencies to be effective in global business. For these
reasons, developing global leaders is one of the priority for human resource management function within
companies. The TietoEnator case study focus on the importance of competencies to maintain the
competitive edge in a global company and also on the importance of a global leadership development
system, that allows to recognize the current competencies and to develop the competencies that are
necessary to the organization in the future. The points above will be explored in the following text
starting by the definition of competencies.

Hogg (2010) defined “Competencies” as behaviours that employees must have, or acquire, in order to
achieve high levels of performance. Therefore, it is possible to distinguish between “competencies”, that
focus on performance and person's skills, and “comptences” that minimum standards required to achieve
an outcome, and that regard the job rather than the person. Moreover, this definition of competency is
based on an input-based approach that focus on the attributes possessed by the best performers that, once
identified, become the base for the future training within an organization. On the other hand, the output-
based approach focus on the competencies as outputs of the organization to be used as distinctive
resources to acquire competitive advantages over rivals.

In literature there have been many definitions of competency that could be summarized in three main
categories. Some authors described competencies as observable performances that could be compared
with a standard to assess the individual's performance. Others described competencies as a standard or
quality of outcome that leads to effective performances in the workplace. The last category considered
competencies as underlying attributes, such as skills, knowledge or abilities, that are required to achieve
competent performances. Although there are different definitions, the commonality among them is that
they all focus on human performances (Hoffmann, 1999).

There are several models, that identify competencies needed by global leaders. Goleman's (2005)
Emotional Intelligence (EI) model focuses on the individual's ability to identify, assess, and control the
emotions of one's self, of others, and of groups. The importance of the emotional intelligence is
recognized by most of all competency models, such as Global Mindset and Global Explorer models. The
EI model is based on the assumption that a successful leadership is driven by competencies, such as
empathy, assertiveness and self confidence, that lead individuals to be aware and manage their own and
others' emotions. This model is demonstrated by several examples. At L’Oreal, sales agents selected
on the basis of certain emotional competencies sold significantly more than others selected in the
past with different procedures. Moreover, the salespeople selected on the basis of emotional
competencies had also 63% less turnover during the first year than the other selected differently
(Spencer et al., 1997). Psychologists criticised this model because It is based on the concept that EI is a
kind of intelligence, while according to Locke (2005), EI is only intelligence applied to a life domain:
emotions; and so, as one possess the same intelligence as someone else, it means that is not possible to
measure performance's differences through emotional intelligence.

However, the EI theory and others, such as Global Explorer and Eight-Nations competency models, only
identified competencies that are important for a global leader using a content approach. As result, they
don't explain how competencies can be acquired, and if all the competencies are important or there are
some of them more important than the others. Moreover the high number of competencies mentioned in
the models is not useful to evaluate the effectiveness of the global leadership and often the different
theories are overlapping and separated only by semantic differences. An Integrative Framework of global
leadership is more suitable to explain the global competency phenomenon. This model distinguishes three
levels of global leadership competencies, but the most important assumption of the model is to distinguish
a group of core competencies, namely self-awareness, personal transformation, and inquisitiveness, that
are the base to develop other competencies (Jokinen 2005).

In Fact, it is necessary to focus on the process that drives to the acquisition of global competencies rather
than simply list the competencies needed by a global leader. The Global competency model's pyramid is
based on a process that start from the global knowledge, that is a basic resource to start a cumulative
process that leads to the progressively acquisition of competencies. An example of global knowledge is
the Indian manager-turned-entrepreneur, who used the knowledge acquired in years of international work
with a large high-tech firm. He saw in a new invention to monitor people under anesthesia the opportunity
to start a business and so, he started a company locating the different operations in different countries and
involving people from different cultures (Osland, 2008). The possession of a global knowledge, mixed
with four specific threshold traits (integrity, humility, inquisitiveness and resilience), allows the
development of orientations and attitudes that contribute to manage effectively in a global context. The
second stage of the process leads to acquire the ability to see multiple perspectives and consider ideas,
people and situation from different angles. This cognitive complexity with an awareness of the world
allows to the leaders to get a Global Mindset that leads to overcome the borders of the own culture. The
third phase regards the acquisition of interpersonal skills to communicate effectively in a multicultural
context. Effective communication is also the base to create and build trust. The capstone of the pyramid
regards systems skills that allow to span boundaries inside and outside the organization, and the building
of a community that includes employees, stakeholders and other organizations that are connected in some
ways to the organization. These skills also require the ability to adapt to cultural differences and to
leverage them for competitive advantage (Osland and Bird, 2004).
The increasing need of global competencies within multicultural organizations is satisfied through several
training programmes, such as cross-cultural training (CCT), diversity training and language training.
Moreover, there are other ways to get global competencies, such as multicultural team, travels, and short-
term assignments (Black et al., 1999). A systematic approach to design an effective CCT programme is
given by Tarique and Caligiuri (2004). They proposed a five-phase process that start from the
identification of the necessary type of global assignment and ends with the evaluation of the training
initiative's effectiveness. Training supplies the basic competencies to face effectively a direct experience
in host countries through international assignments (Caligiuri et al., 2005). International assignments are
the most powerful tool to develop global leaders (Fernandez, 2003).

Developing global competencies, for a multinational organization requires appropriates Global

Leadership Development (GLD) programs that allow an organization to develop global leaders as It is
also underlined in the TietoEnator case study. In fact, to make sure that its employees could acquire
global competencies, TietoEnator focused its human resources programs on training initiatives involving
employees with different cultures. GLD methods are the global application of the traditional leadership
development programs, such as executive coaching, job assignments or outdoor experiences (Oddou and
Mendenhall, 2008). Moreover, in today's competitive global business environment is really important to
supply resources to both enhance employees' cross-cultural competence and to increase employees'
contributions to the organization's global objectives (Evans et al., 2002).

Colgate's GLD program is a significant example of global leadership development initiatives. The
Colgate-Palmolive (C-G) global training approach is focused, first of all, on the “Valuing Colgate-
Palmolive people” workshop that is offered to all the C-G workers around the world and ensures that all
of them know how C-P works worldwide. Moreover, C-P trains its employees through seventy different
global programs in all the business areas. C-P also goes beyond the training, in fact, every month there's a
human resource committee that meets to discuss employees' rotation, and every year there's a “leadership
challenge” where the best performers from all the C-P world meet for a training week program. The
global HR monitoring system is also very important for C-P because it identifies the key competences
necessary to the organization and allows to develop individual plans to develop the competencies required
(“Colgate-Palmolive seeks tomorrow’s global leader: Searching for success in the international arena”
2004).

The Global leadership competency model has been also criticised by several authors. One criticism argues
that lists of universal competencies don't fit with all the organizational cultures. In fact, more generic and
universal a competency is, less it may fit a particular organizational culture. This criticism proposes to
identify the necessary key competencies, and then to create a customized model involving all the
members of the organization, that in this way would be more motivated to use and accept it to learn new
competencies. Another criticism assumes that the competency model focuses on the individual's skills
undervaluing the collective competency (Davies and Ellison, 1997).

Concluding, due to the globalization managers all over the world need to get competencies that make
them acquire the ability to work with people from different countries and with different values and
cultures. The acquisition of competencies is a progressive process made of a mix of cross-cultural
initiatives such as international training and experiences that allow managers to get global skills and cope
with diversity. The development of global leaders is the main issue for the Human Resources functions
within the organizations, and the global leadership development programs are very important to transfer
to all the employees the current and future competencies needed by the organization to acquire and
maintain competitive advantages.

Question 4

In the last decade, the large part of the firms are doing business with companies from other countries,
so, It is necessary to achieve international agreements. Reaching satisfactory agreements will require
negotiations among counterparts from different countries, that will need an alignment of the differences.
Limits to negotiations would regard mainly cultural differences, because each country has its own values
that generate different behaviours and understanding. As result, there could be conflicts due to
misunderstandings among people from different cultures. (Gulbrio and Herbig, 1999). This essay will
start from a general definition of negotiation and will explore conflicts and their resolution within the
organizations and among organizations in organizations characterized by different cultures. Moreover,
differences in negotiation styles of individuals with different cultural backgrounds and strategies able to
overcome the differences will be explored at the end of the work.
Negotiation is a process, rather than a skill, of interaction between two or more parties that initially have
different objectives and that need to achieve a common outcome. The process of negotiation leads,
through argument and persuasion, to overcome the differences in order to achieve a mutual acceptable
solution (Fowler, 1996). Negotiation occurs when an issue cannot be solved by one acting alone, or when
two or more people have two different points of view on a common issue. On the contrary, Negotiation
doesn't, or cannot, occur when one part immediately agree, or refuses to discuss the problem. The
outcome of a negotiation is affected by several objective and logical facts, but the major factors are
influence and persuasion, that are more subjective and related to the individual's behaviours. Influence
involves the effect on each person of the whole context in which an issue is discussed, while persuasion is
related to the skills that can be used to obtain another's agreement. Factors that influence the negotiations
are personal relationships, status differences, formality, information and expertise, gender, race and age
differences, reputation, expectations about outcomes, timing, work pressures, connections with sources of
organisational power and the negotiating environment. Persuading skills are related to behaviours that
help to achieve the outcome of the negotiation, such as having a collaborative or confrontational style,
seeing owns objectives from the other person's viewpoint, talking and listening to the others, using
adjournments or breaks in a discussion, conceding to avoid to stuck a discussion and finding
compromises, summarising the points arose in a discussion, using of body language and taking the
initiative to achieve an agreement (Fowler, 1995).

Adler (1991), identified skills required to a good international negotiator. Listening skills are necessary as
well as a people-oriented attitude. Sensitivity to cultural differences is necessary before to start to
negotiate to understand the other's party culture. Moreover, high self-esteem, high aspiration, attractive
personality and willingness to use team assistance complete the set of skills required. In addition, Cohen
(1999), focused on the key role played by language and communication in cross-cultural negotiations
because people in different cultures give different meanings for the same words and, so, it is really
important the choice regarding the language of the negotiation or the use of translators or interpreters.

Negotiating across cultures differs from negotiating in the domestic market and it requires to consider
factors regarding different languages, legal systems, tax regimes, cultural sensitivities and different
business practices of the (Hurn, 2007). According to Scott (1981) people from different cultures have
different values, different attitudes and experience that influence not only the behaviour of the people but
also their way to negotiate. He also identified different styles and strengths of the way to negotiate of
people from different countries. In literature, the most significant differences has been found between
individualist cultures, such as Americans, and Collectivist cultures such as Japanese. For example people
from individualistic cultures prefer confrontational procedures in negotiations processes while
collectivists prefer harmony-enhancing procedures like mediation to overcome disputes (Leung, 1987).
Another difference is that Japanese negotiators prefer use more influence power in negotiations while US
ones prefer power tactics, that is related to the hierarchical and egalitarian values(Adair et al., 2001).
Although these differences, it has been found that during cross-cultural negotiations both Americans and
Japanese try to adapt their styles each during negotiations (Weiss, 1994:1-2)

Most of the literature describes negotiation styles of managers from different countries, or compares their
behaviours (Adler, 1983). The underlying assumption of descriptive and comparative studies is that
people behave with foreign counterparts the same they do with their domestic colleagues. Therefore,
managers would use the style they use in their country in a cross-cultural negotiation. However, Adler and
Graham (1989:520) distinguish between intra-cultural and cross-cultural behaviours, and Sawyer and
Guetzkow (1965) demonstrated that behaviours are influenced by situational constraints. The
Acculturation and Negotiation theories demonstrate critically the inconsistency of the negotiation's
descriptive and comparative studies. According to the first theory, individuals from different cultures
change their behaviours when they interact continuously each other. The second theory identifies three
factors influencing negotiations that are negotiators characteristics, situational constraints and process-
related measures. The process-related measures can be influenced by the other two factors and can
influence the negotiation outcomes (Adler and Graham, 1989:520-523).

Negotiation is needed also within organizations to overcome conflicts among people both from the same
and different cultures. Therefore, it is possible to distinguish between intra-organizational and cross-
organizational conflicts. In fact, conflicts arise not only because of differences among cultures, but also
among people having different behaviours and belong to the same organization. In any organization,
individuals have different behaviours and it is possible to distinguish Narcissistic, Obsessive, Collectivist
or Individualist characters. Narcissistic tend to be difficult to accommodate within organizations,
obsessive individuals tend to be perfect in a standardized and bureaucratic organization, the collectivists
tend to suppress their difference and individuality within the organization, while individualists pursuit
individual glory and fame (Gabriel and Schwartz, 1999). Within organizations conflicts arise
continuously between departments and divisions, and among groups within them. Conflict is an
interpersonal phenomenon that is part of the organization life (Perrow, 1978).

Conflict is an incompatible behaviour between parties whose interests differ. Possible causes of conflicts
could be, specific problem or issue, a misunderstanding during a conversation or a meeting, poor
communication and communication breakdowns, personal antagonism or personality clashes. Sometimes
an issue could extend other issue and involve more people in the conflict. Restrictive cultures can be a
huge cause of conflicts while in open culture not only there will be less conflicts but they will be solved
more easily. Polarisation regard the fragmentation of the groups in camps with different points of view.
Other cause may be discrimination, harassment and bullying (Fox, 2002).

There are many conflict resolution methods and approaches. Thomas (1976) proposed five conflict
resolution approaches based on two dimensions that are, the degree of assertiveness or non assertiveness
of each party in pursuing its concerns, and the degree of cooperation or not cooperation of each party in
satisfying the concerns of the other. Competing is an approach where one part wins the conflict and the
other looses. Another approach is avoiding the issue by a party with a behaviour unassertive and
uncooperative. Compromising is an approach where the counterparts find an acceptable solution for both.
Accommodating is an approach where a party has a cooperative and unassertive behaviour and so, likely
the other party will take advantages. The collaborating approach involves both parties to find a solution
that is seen as fair for both. Other strategies are distributive bargaining that generates a win-lose solution,
and integrative bargaining that leads to a win-win solution where both parties get an advantage.
Arbitration and mediation are strategies where the solution are achieved by the involvement of a third
party to solve the disputes (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2010).

However, when the negotiation involves counterparts from different countries are required different
approaches that take into the account the cultural differences to be effective in negotiation. Weiss
(1994:2-11) elaborated the Eight Culturally Responsive strategies model, that help negotiators to align
their cultural differences and to achieve a mutual accepted agreement. The interactions between the
negotiator's level of familiarity with the counterpart's culture and the counterpart's familiarity with the
negotiator's culture are the dimensions that distinguish the different strategies. The model is based on the
assumption that the two parties involved belong to different predominant cultures, such as American and
Japanese. When the negotiator has low familiarity with the counterpart's culture there are two possible
strategies, employing a cultural expert like an Agent or Adviser, or involving a Mediator. In this case,
when the counterpart has an high familiarity of the negotiator's culture is possible to use a model of
negotiation of the negotiator's culture. If the negotiator has a moderate familiarity with the counterpart's
culture, he has two more strategies. He can adapt is behaviours to the ones of the counterpart, or they both
could coordinate and adjust their behaviours creating a third approach that fit with both cultures. When
the negotiator has an high familiarity with the counterpart's culture, he can use three more strategies
jointly with the five aforementioned. If the counterpart has a low familiarity of the negotiator's culture the
approach can embrace the counterpart's culture. If both parties have high familiarity of their cultures the
negotiator can improvise an approach taking into account more the individual and the circumstances
rather than the counterpart's culture, or if there is an higher familiarity the effect symphony strategy can
be used. This strategy regards is an effort to find an approach that go beyond the parties' cultures. These
strategies can be all used and they go beyond the main literature that lists behaviours to use facing
particular cultures. Therefore different strategies can be used during a negotiation problem according to
the situation and relationships among the counterparts.
Concluding, conflict and negotiation are phenomenon that occur both within and among the
organizations, and in the last decades, globalization led to an enlargement of the issues due to the increase
of the involvement of different cultures in business interactions. For these reasons, to be effective in a
global context, leaders need to get negotiation skills that allow them to overcome conflicts within and
beyond the organizations, taking into account cultural differences and the degree of familiarity when they
decide to use or implement a strategy to overcome the conflicts and the differences.