Abstract
As cross-cultural studies become crucial to business enterprises and other societal organizations that compete internationally, this article assesses managerial outlook toward trust in China and Pakistan. Questionnaire data were collected from two separate groups, different in term of anthropogeography, culture and economy, so it was not surprising to find that these prospective managers also differ in their outlook toward trust. Also noted are, however, multiple significant similarities. The present study offers a refreshing approach to cross-cultural comparisons pertaining to trust. Based on the findings, the study also provides suggestions for management and practitioners and recommends new directions for future research.
Introduction
In today’s world cross-functional and interdisciplinary teams are a necessity to tackle the complex organizational challenges. Countries are increasingly interested in forming economic-blocks with close allies, as evidenced, for instance, by formation of BRICKS and initiation of One-Belt-One-Road initiative. Such alliances will further accelerate globalization and multiculturalism with this effect markedly pronounced at organizational or industrial level. The managers and employees in such work-places will need to re-adjust and re-process some norms to achieve a new acceptable equilibrium. Policies will need to be put in place to nurture work-force collegiality. Establishing trust in a cross-cultural environment will be a challenge and one that, we can expect, will require creative thinking and innovative efforts by managers to yoke together a purposeful team.
With growing Chinese economic and political influence on the international forum and its close ties with Pakistan, there is a need for better understanding of Chinese work culture. It is for this purpose that we examine how employees in these two countries perceive trust and compare its role for organizational success. The two cultures can traditionally be considered collectivist but differences still exist. Media organizations are perhaps where these differences might be stark and easier to separate, China with a closely monitored media setup while Pakistan with a rapidly expanding private media sector. For this reason, in this article, we focus on media organizations from China and Pakistan.
Theoretical background and hypothesis
Trust
Trust can be defined as ‘a willingness to be vulnerable to another, based on the belief that the other is reliable, open, competent and concerned’ (Mishra et al., 2011: 43). In cooperative relations trust is a fundamental component, promoting coordination in workplace and leading to improved performance [1, 2]. Effective management entails novel and subtle trust-building exercises [3].
In organizations where trust has been established, advantageous effects, such as; reduced transactional costs by decreasing requirement for monitoring [3], compromise and willingness to take on extra responsibilities can be observed.
Managerial trust
Managerial trust, despite diversity in literature [4], has widely been accepted as the assumptions, expectations, or beliefs of an individual that the future action/s of others (supervisors, managers, owners) will be beneficial, advantageous, or at least not detrimental to their individual interests. The presence or lack of such trust, and its severity, can have a notable impact on the organization.
With balanced and employee sensitive managerial practices, managers can engender trust between employees [4–7]. Consequently, employees expect their managers to be consistent, honest, and competent during any crises, disagreements and conflicts [8]. Managerial trust has also been perceived as a substitute for hierarchical control [9]. As managers are primary designers of the organizational forms, the initiators of many vertical exchanges who control the flow of certain type of information and opportunities to share information [10], maintaining and developing trust is particularly critical to managerial and organizational effectiveness [11].
Cross-cultural trust
Culture is the homogeneity of characteristics of values, norms, and institutions distinguishing human groups [12]. In cross-cultural context, trust is a highly relevant issue for both employees and employers [13]. Many researchers jeremiad the dearth of integrative theories on trust [14, 15], but, herein, we only use trust as a comparative tool across two cultures.
Cultural differences were traditionally viewed as obstacles to organizational performance, it’s long-term existence and research institutions professional reputation [16]. Previous findings have shown that individuals’ trusting choices are both highly personalized and decontextualized [17]. Researchers have indicated significant differences in the degree of trust between different countries and the impact on countries economic functioning and success [18]. Trust in business relations between firms depends on the common expected development, which is shaped, at least in part, by the institutional environment in which actors are ingrained [19].
Building and maintaining trust between cultures is a challenge [20]. Individuals from diverse cultures often bring to relation building efforts ‘foreigner’ beliefs and values, ‘distinct’ conducts and even inconsistent theorizations, which can thwart effective interactions and productive associations [17, 21]. Cross-cultural relations can entail misunderstandings, embarrassment, low self-efficacy and even mental suffering [22]. People and countries akin to each other, trust each other more and, thus, can transfer expertise and resources faster and more successfully [23, 24]. It is in this regard that our work is of value, before we can theorize strategies to nurture wholesome trust in a cross-cultural environment it is pertinent to compare and contrast them, as is, to gain valuable insight into how individuals perceive trust.
Methodology
Sample
Full-time media employees from China and Pakistan were selected as candidates for this study. Media is an evolving, distinct occupation [25–27] and performs quite differently for the two countries.
Data collection activities took place from December 2016 to July 2017 and were HR managers or the key employees who took responsibility for distribution and collection of survey instruments. Questionnaire were completed on site and were sealed by each respondent to ensure individual confidentiality. In the translation of the questionnaire the back-translation method was used, where the questionnaire is first translated into the target/resident language and then blindly translated back to the original/source language [28].
A total of 512 usable responses were received. The sample comprises of 270 (52.7%) Chinese employees, and 242 (47.3%) Pakistani employees; 302 employees were (58.9%) males and 210 (41.1%) were females. Of these 169 (33.0%) were less than 25 years old, and 343 (67.0%) were 25 or older. Thirty-four percent of the participants were single, 58% married, and 8% widowed, separated, or divorced. With regards to education, the largest proportion reported graduation 55%, master degree 27%, Ph.D. less than 1%, and secondary education certificate 17%.
Measurement
A 14-item trust climate was used as an instrument to collect employee attitudes towards trust climate [29]. The trust climate measure used a 5-point scale strongly disagree - strongly agree. Sample items include “Employee’s questions and problems are responded to quickly,” “Employee’s hard work is appreciated,” “Employees are treated fairly”. The reliability coefficient for this scale was 0.95 (China) and α= 0.93 (Pakistan). See the appendix for each of the 14 items.
Analysis and results
Table 1 presents the significance differences in mean scores which were measured using a two-tail test outlook towards trust for the 14 items collected, and each item in this scale is investigated for the China and Pakistan comparatively.
t-tests for the trust China and Pakistan
t-tests for the trust China and Pakistan
Note. **p < 0.01,*p < 0.05; SD = standard deviation.
We hypothesis that there would be significant variances/differences in reported outlook toward trust between the participants from China and Pakistan. The t-test results of the two means show that, on average, China participants reported significantly higher levels of propensity for the items 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12. On the other hand, the only two items are significantly lower levels of outlook towards trust are 3 and 14 (see Table 1). Given that there were significant difference reported outlook towards trust for 11 out of the 14 trust items, so our hypothesis is accepted. Consequently, it is established that the stated outlook toward trust between participants from China and Pakistan differs
In this study, we compared responses to trust related dilemmas across media employees in China and Pakistan. Our findings indicate a difference in outlook towards trust in eleven of the fourteen items.
These results indicate that the two groups place considerable importance on having managerial trust. While most items were comparable some statistically significant divergences are also observed. Chinese respondents feel decidedly stronger than Pakistani respondents that businesses are receptive to trust, respect and problem solving – items that traditionally govern personal behavior (items 4, 7 and 11). Example include “Employees’ questions and problems are responded to quickly”, and “Employees’ hard work is appreciated”.
Popular Chinese sayings like: A promise cannot be taken back once it is made (yi yan ji chu si ma nan zhui), lend support to a cultural and business philosophy where trust is of supreme importance. This philosophy could be the most vital construct that is influencing the growth of strong enduring business relations for China throughout the world [30, 31]. Furthermore, the international monetary fund (IMF) finds that several developing nations are pinning their expectations and confidences on China’s continued prosperity while adhering to this philosophy of trust [32].
In short, if this trust trend continues, China is on track to become the world’s largest economy with trust as its bedrock for managers and healthy organization cultures. Although Chinese employees have demonstrated higher inclination towards most of the trust items, in two cases a stronger significance is observed for Pakistani employees (items 3 and 14) related to supervisor playing favorites and employees being treated as equal. A probable justification could be that Pakistan management makes strong distinction between trust from the head (i.e. trusting someone because of his/her professional competencies) and trust from heart (i.e. trusting someone because of your good relationships with him/her); favor the first while the Chinese management puts more reliance on personal relationships. In the vein, guanxi consisting of three different aspects: xinren, ganqing, and renqing could provide a possible clue. The latter (xinren) is a deep personal trust and it takes time to develop because that is judged by the partner on the basis of previous promise keeping history. This can have implications where a joint work-force is present and the management will need to be aware of their employees’ mindsets; do they crave a more personal relationship or one where a gap exists between the two and one-for-all policies are implemented. Anyhow it will be critical for the management to be, firstly, aware of cultural nuances and, secondly, determining a roadmap that will placate and support all employees with bias.
While the current examination makes a contribution to research in cross-cultural trust comparison, the reader should be reminded of its limitations. First, because sample is limited to business media employees, generalizing the results of this study to the general populace is not appropriate. One interesting avenue for future research is to enlarge the sample base to include business managers from diverse institutions. This would permit for a comparison in outlook towards trust between current and prospective business managers in each country.
Conclusion
When comparing outlook of trust in organizations, even countries with comparable cultures and similar national values may find subtle but important differences. It will be illogical to assume that your own view of trust is always admirable. This form of nationalism is a common human condition and must be re-adjusted and re-evaluated when multiple cultures are present. Although companies have become accustomed to educating their management of the customs and language of foreign trade associates, such education must be developed to embrace reliance anticipations. This acquaintance will lend a hand to trim down misinterpretations, help boost confidence and build trust in workplace, across organizations and nations.
Footnotes
Appendix (Trust items)
Reflect the following statements about trust outlook in questions 1–14. Indicate your position regarding each by writing a number in the blank before each statement.
1 (strongly disagree) 2 (disagree) 3 (not sure) 4 (agree) 5 (strongly agree) Employees are praised for good work. Supervisors yell at employees. Supervisors play favorites. Employees are trusted. Employees are treated with children. Employees are treated with respect. Employees’ questions and problems are responded to quickly. Employees are lied to. Employees’ suggestions are ignored. Supervisors swear at employees. Employees’ hard work is appreciated. Supervisors threaten to fire or lay off employees. Employees’ complaints are dealt with effectively. Employees are treated fairly.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71472055, 71272175, 71002061), National Science Foundation for Post-doctoral Scientists of China (201104424, 2012M520697), Heilongjiang Philosophy and Social Science Research Project (14B105), and the Project sponsored by SRF for ROCS, SEM.