Hrm Practices in South Asia Essays

Hrm Practices in South Asia Essays Hrm Practices in South Asia Essay Hrm Practices in South Asia Essay South Asia, also known as Southern Asia, is the southern region of the Asian continent, which comprises the sub-Himalayan countries and, for some authorities (see below), also includes the adjoining countries to the west and the east. Topographically, it is dominated by the Indian Plate, which rises above sea level as the Indian subcontinent south of the Himalayas and the Hindu Kush. South Asia is surrounded (clockwise, from west) by Western Asia, Central Asia, Eastern Asia, Southeastern Asia and the Indian Ocean. According to the United Nations geographical region classification, Southern Asia comprises the countries of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Maldives, Afghanistan, Iran and Sri Lanka. By other definitions and interpretations (see below), Myanmar and Tibet are also sometimes included in the region of South Asia. South Asia is home to well over one fifth of the worlds population, making it both the most populous and most densely populated geographical region in the world. The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation is an economic cooperation organization in the region. South America Backgorund Using survey data from the Americas Barometer by the Latin American Public Opinion Project at Vanderbilt, Corral concluded that â€Å"happiness in Latin America and the Caribbean is related to economic factors as well as social, political and demographic factors. At least within this region, economic development at the national levels explains different levels of life satisfaction among citizens in the region. † Corral found that economic factors- income and perceptions of the individual and national situations- bear a positive correlation with levels of life satisfaction. It is no surprise, then, that survey respondents in earthquake-ravaged Haiti, the poorest country in the region, ranked the lowest on the life satisfaction index at 35. 4 percent. But, most people in the rest of Latin America see themselves as happy. Brazil led the pack at 71. 6 percent, followed by Costa Rica (67. 7 percent), Venezuela (65. 6 percent) and Panama (65. 1 percent), with Trinidad Tobago and Honduras tied at 63. 3 percent. Jamaica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Belize and Peru are all above 50 percent. For the region as a whole, perception of individual economic conditions is by far the strongest predictor of individual happiness, Corral found. Those with better economic profiles are happier. A person’s subjective view of his wealth was more influential on his satisfaction level than an objective measure of wealth. â€Å"It is possible that this relationship is driven by dual causality,† Corral wrote. â€Å"A perceived positive economic situation increases happiness, and as well, happy people tend to perceive better economic situations. Marriage has a positive but not significant effect on life satisfaction among the region’s citizens, Corral found. Churchgoers and those who are surrounded by people they trust register high levels of satisfaction. Women, the elderly, young adults, the better educated and those who live in large cities likewise express high levels of happiness. Having children and being unemployed weigh negatively on individual satisfaction. Co untry People values, Business Tradition, Etiquette Business Culture of South Asia Historically, South Asia is an agricultural country with a very small industrial sector employing about 40 percent of the active labor force. Smallness of industrial sector may seem to be congenial to the development of a healthy industrial relationship but this could not be realized even within a period of fifty-eight years of the country’s independence. While some of the reasons of this failure are historical and traditional cultural background, many are in fact attributable to the poor management system and legal system concerning industrial relations in the country. Usually trade unions are organized mostly on the basis of political, regional and even personal loyalties which was encouraged by the capitalists who often had restored to the policy of buying a fraction of the union or putting up one of their own to divide the union movement by extending some â€Å"under the table favors† to a group of union leaders. In addition, the system of HRM in South Asia is largely due to its own business heritage and traditional historical realities. In fact, historic forces shape HRM practices in that society, and largely influence the efficient HRM system of a society along with other things. Thus to make a correct assessment about human resource management system and practices in South Asia, it is necessary to make a through investigation into the development of Muslim and Hindu employer and employees and entrepreneurship in various phases of history and culture. The above situation as it stands suggests that, as a class of each group does not belong to a highly motivated and committed entrepreneurial class. The easiest explanation rationalizing this situation is, as often quoted, British colonial rule of two centuries in the past are responsible for this. Apparently, the explanation seems to be sensible and logical. However, this needs further explanation and demands clarification and comprehension. It is understandable that the colonial powers ( British rule) did not in their own interest encourage the growth of a significant industrial and efficient HRM practices base in this part of the subcontinent ( India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) and the deadlocks were created by them towards the development of effective HRM system in the area. The overall supply of competent management personnel, their profiles, and culture to which they belong and under which they work, also has significant impacts on the features and practices of HRM system in South Asia national culture. In general, to learn the expertise of building an effective HRM practices is very important for the attainment of an industrial efficiency, but most South Asian managers are traditionalistic. They tend to resist changes and develop participation within boss and subordinates. South Asia managers do not believe in the development of human resources, and they believe that machines are more important than humans. Several empirical studies (Read, 1962; Negahndi and Reiman, 1973) conclude that increased participation leads to improvement in several of organizational effectiveness. However, it should be noted that the closeness of relationship between participation and overall organizational effectives depends on the quality of its human resources. As suggested above, when a large complex organization is more participative minded and more decentralized most of the decisions are made at unit level. In this kind of organization, managerial employees need more technical management skill and knowledge. Top management in large organizations has neither the time nor expertise to make such decisions for unit level (Price, 1968). Properly trained managers and employees of participative organizations can overcome communication problems, make effective decisions at the point of action, and thus contribute to the achievement of more firm effectiveness. Business Culture of Latin America First, the high Power Distance (PD) that Hofstede noted in most Latin American countries has important ramifications. In practical terms, high PD means that social courtesies and formality are more important in Latin America than in the U. S. Latin American managers are expected to be more gracious and respectful than their U. S. counterparts, and the hierarchy is more noticeable For instance, while U. S. managers generally call employees by their first names, it is much more common in Latin America for managers to call employees senorita Martinez or senor Ramirez. Also, people in the Latin American workplace tend to use usted (Ud. , the formal â€Å"you,† rather than tu, the informal, â€Å"you,† when addressing others, and this applies to both supervisors and lower-level employees. When two members of the executive board converse privately, they may call each other â€Å"Jorge† and â€Å"Ana,† but in front of employees they are likely to switch to calling each other â€Å"senor Zapata† and â€Å"senora Gomez. † Finally, Latin American managers typically dress more formally than their U. S. counterparts, and are less likely to work beside their employees and â€Å"get their hands dirty. In addition to courtesy and formality, it is important to note how a high PD rating affects the way meetings are organized. One Mexican manager commented that meetings in Latin America are typically not thought of as a way for supervisors and employees to exchange ideas. Instead, information flows primarily from the top down in meetings. In other words, it would generally be considered inappropriate and disrespectful in Latin America for an employee to correct a supervisor or make a suggestion in front of other employees. At meetings, supervisors expect subordinates to listen attentively, more than offering input. Similarly, participatory management styles and employee empowerment are unfamiliar to most Latin Americans, and in many cases are perceived as neither helpful nor desirable. In some instances, global companies have successfully implemented these kinds of managerial techniques in Latin American subsidiaries, but in other cases attempts to solicit employee input and involve workers in decision-making have been met with hostility. One American manager of a factory in Guadalajara, Mexico was told point blank by the head of a local labor union to stop involving employees in decision-making and asking for their opinions. He told her pointedly, â€Å"You are in charge. You make the decisions! † The deference afforded to managers often has an impact on attitudes toward formal rules and regulations in Latin America. Persons in authority are more likely to be obeyed than a written policy, because of the respect they are given and the position they occupy. This attitude contrasts with the U. S. where most people tend to believe that rules should be applied impartially and without exception, in order to ensure fairness and justice. It is likely to observe all these results of high PD when you visit Latin America, but as one prepare to go to Nicaragua, keep in mind a principle presented earlier: variance within a culture. While Hofstede does not provide Cultural Dimension ratings for Nicaragua, the numbers for Ni caragua’s neighbors are fascinating: Panama and Guatemala both score 95 on PD, and are among the most hierarchical societies in the world, but Costa Rica scores only 35, which is a lower PD rating than even the U. S. earned. For that reason, it is important to be sensitive to how hierarchies play out in Nicaragua specifically. In addition to PD, it is important to mention the low Individuality (IND) rating that predominates in Latin America. In the workplace, low IND means employees tend to value harmony and good relationships more than personal advancement, and are expected to be loyal, hard-working, and willing to do whatever they are asked to do. In return for their hard work and loyalty, Latin American workers generally expect their employers to be loyal to them as well. Because of the group orientation, the employer-worker relationship tends to be more paternal in Latin America than in the U. S. Latin American firms typically treat employees as a sort of extended family, which often involves a wider range of benefits, such as subsidized or free lunches, more inclusive medical coverage, and holiday bonuses. It has already been pointed out that most Hispanic countries score very high on Uncertainty Avoidance (UA), which suggests that most Latin Americans prefer security and avoiding risk. This may help explain why technology is not as prevalent in Latin America as in the U. S. To be sure, poverty is part of the picture, but Latin Americans tend to be less enamored of technology for technology’s sake than many Americans. Due in part to the high UA rating, many Latin Americans perceive less of a need to upgrade, modernize, and replace old technology with cutting edge products. This may affect a given entrepreneur’s attitudes toward technological upgrades, adopting new computing systems, etc. One notable exception to this principle is the use of cell phones- due to infrastructure and bureaucratic issues associated with land lines, there are more cell phones in most Latin American countries than land lines. Lastly, the importance of family and personal relationships also impacts the workplace. For example, it is more common in Latin America to seek employment with family members, hire family members, and look to the family for help in times of need. In addition, many Latin Americans feel more comfortable doing business with people they know personally, and developing that relationship is often considered an essential first step. Americans who try to move things along more quickly and â€Å"get to the point† may become frustrated and/or offend Latin Americans. South Asian HRM Practices Recruitment and Selection

The Causes of the Downfall of Communism

The Causes of the Downfall of Communism Communism gained a strong foothold in the world during the first half of the 20th century, with one-third of the worlds population living under some form of communism by the 1970s. However, just a decade later, many of the major communist governments around the world toppled. What brought about this collapse? The First Cracks in the Wall By the time Joseph Stalin died in March of 1953, the Soviet Union had emerged as a major industrial power. Despite the reign of terror that defined Stalin’s regime, his death was mourned by thousands of Russians and brought about a general sense of uncertainty about the future of the Communist state. Soon following Stalin’s death, a power struggle ensued for leadership of the Soviet Union. Nikita Khrushchev eventually emerged the victor but the instability that had preceded his ascent to the premiership had emboldened some anti-Communists within the eastern European satellite states. Uprisings in both Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia were quickly quelled but one of the most significant uprisings occurred in East Germany. In June of 1953, workers in East Berlin staged a strike over conditions in the country that soon spread to the rest of the nation. The strike was quickly crushed by East German and Soviet military forces and sent a strong message that any dissent against Communist rule would be dealt with harshly. Nevertheless, unrest continued to spread throughout Eastern Europe and hit a crescendo in 1956, when both Hungary and Poland saw massive demonstrations against Communist rule and Soviet influence. Soviet forces invaded Hungary in November of 1956 to crush what was now being called the Hungarian Revolution. Scores of Hungarians died as a result of the invasion, sending waves of concern throughout the western world. For the time being, the military actions seemed to have put a damper on anti-Communist activity. Just a few decades later, it would start again. The Solidarity Movement The 1980s would see the emergence of another phenomenon that would ultimately chip away at the Soviet Union’s power and influence. The Solidarity movement- championed by the Polish activist Lech Walesa- emerged as a reaction to policies introduced by the Polish Communist Party in 1980. In April 1980, Poland decided to curb food subsidies, which had been a life-line for many Poles suffering through economic difficulties. Polish shipyard workers in the city of Gdansk decided to organize a strike when petitions for wage-increases were denied. The strike quickly spread across the country, with factory workers all over Poland voting to stand in solidarity with the workers in Gdansk. Strikes continued for the next 15 months, with negotiations ongoing between the leaders of Solidarity and the Polish Communist regime. Finally, in October of 1982, the Polish government decided to order full martial law, which saw an end to the Solidarity movement. Despite its ultimate failure, the movement saw a foreshadowing of the end of Communism in Eastern Europe.   Gorbachev In March of 1985, the Soviet Union gained a new leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev was young, forward-thinking, and reform-minded. He knew the Soviet Union faced many internal problems, not the least of which was an economic downturn and a general sense of discontentment with Communism. He wanted to introduce a broad policy of economic restructuring, which he called perestroika. However, Gorbachev knew that the regime’s powerful bureaucrats had often stood in the way of economic reform in the past. He needed to get the people on his side to put pressure on the bureaucrats and thus introduced two new policies: glasnost (meaning ‘openness’) and demokratizatsiya (democratization). They were intended to encourage ordinary Russian citizens to openly voice their concern and unhappiness with the regime. Gorbachev hoped the policies would encourage people to speak out against the central government and thus put pressure on the bureaucrats to approve his intended economic reforms. The policies had their intended effect but soon got out of control. When Russians realized that Gorbachev would not crack down on their newly won freedom of expression, their complaints went far beyond mere discontentment with the regime and the bureaucracy. The whole concept of communism- its history, ideology, and effectiveness as a system of government- came up for debate. These democratization policies made Gorbachev extremely popular both in Russia and abroad. Falling Like Dominoes When people all across Communist Eastern Europe got wind that the Russians would do little to quell dissent, they began to challenge their own regimes and work to develop pluralist systems in their countries. One by one, like dominoes, Eastern Europe’s Communist regimes began to topple. The wave started with Hungary and Poland in 1989 and soon spread to Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania. East Germany, too, was rocked by nation-wide demonstrations that eventually led the regime there to allow its citizens to travel once more to the West. Scores of people crossed the border and both East and West Berliners (who had not had contact in almost 30 years) gathered around the Berlin Wall, dismembering it bit by bit with pickaxes and other tools. The East German government was unable to hold onto power and the reunification of Germany occurred soon after, in 1990. One year later, in December of 1991, the Soviet Union disintegrated and ceased to exist. It was the final death knell of the Cold War and marked an end of Communism in Europe, where it had first been established 74 years prior. Although Communism has nearly died out, there are still five countries that remain Communist: China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam.