The passage of the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) along with more recent immigration of Mexican
Americans has led to newer understandings of the power-distance dynamics of communication
embedded in the South American culture. As new business partnerships emerge
that lead to the furthering of relationships in Mexico, American managers will
need to understand how communication and culture influences the organization
processes. Furthermore, strong managers should have a global perspective to
more effectively manage diverse cultures.
Mexico is seen as having a high
power distance culture. They ranked with a score of 81 points that puts them fifth
among 50 countries within the study (Hofstede’s, 2001). The greater this
high-power distance the more uncomfortable employees feel when talking to
managers, executives and others within positions of authority. Such employees
would feel a natural anxiety when trying to connect with their supervisors and
managers.
Imagine for a moment that you were a manager of
employees from Mexico. You may not understand why they seem so silent,
unwilling to bring forward problems, and not take initiative when problems
occur. They seem to wait for direction and may not act even if such actions
would have a positive result for the company. This could be part of issues
related to the power-distance dynamics of two varying cultures.
It has been stated that such dynamics are “that silence can exact a high psychological
price on individuals, generating feelings of humiliation, pernicious anger,
resentment, and the like that, if unexpressed, contaminate every interaction,
shut down creativity, and undermine productivity” (Perlow & Williams,
2003, p. 52). When cultures encourage such behaviors there is going to be less
innovation and development within organizations as the environment creates
passivity.
This means that managers need to engage such
employees, build the right environments, and develop ways to create
communication networks that result in productive outputs. By developing
stronger relationships with such employees it begins adjust and create behaviors
that are more productive. It takes time for employees to feel comfortable
around managers and their positional powers before positive communication patterns
can be developed. Trust develops over time.
A study by Madlock (2012) helps to highlight how the
cultural aspects of power-distance influence communication styles. Through the
surveying of 168 Mexican participants from non-managerial jobs the concepts of
power distance, approach avoidance, communication apprehension, organizational commitment,
communication satisfaction, and job satisfaction were measured.
Results:
-Mexican employees exhibited more signs
of power distance and use of avoidance methods.
-Mexican employees used less approach
messages.
-There was a relationship between
communication satisfaction and communication avoidance.
-There was a negative relationship
between communication satisfaction and use of approach messages.
-Positive relationships existed between
communication satisfaction, job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
Analysis:
Employees from cultures
with high power distance relationships naturally do not engage their
environment well without help from management. The anxiety they feel when
talking to people of higher authority leads to avoidance of such interactions.
In such populations some employees will be more inclined to withdraw even
further which lowers their communicative engagement with others as well as their
satisfaction with the employer. Through the engagement of Mexican workers, and
others from similar type cultures, it is possible to raise their trust of
management for higher levels of performance.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s
consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations
across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Madlock, P. (2012). The
Influence of Power Distance and Communication on Mexican Workers. Journal of
Business Communication, 49 (2).
Perlow, L., & Williams, S.
(2003). Is silence killing your company? Harvard Business Review,
81, 52-58.
