Tania Elena Gonzalez Alvarado
University of Guadalajara, Mexico
E-mail: tania.gonzalez@cucea.udg.mx
José Sánchez Gutiérrez
University of Guadalajara, Mexico
E-mail: jsanchez@cucea.udg.mx
Submission: 05/12/2016
Revision: 12/01/2017
Accept: 10/02/2017
ABSTRACT
The
objective of this work is to analyze how conflict gives way to entrepreneurial
innovation as a result of facing the non-compatibility between
universalism-particularism at the subsidiary of a transnational company located
in Mexico. The evidence was obtained by means of a survey, interviews, analysis
of electronic mails, minutes of work, project documents and systemic
observation. For this research, the SPSS and the root cause analysis were
required. Conflict derived from non-compatibility between Universalism and
Particularism leads to a more accurate decision making process.
Keywords: value generation or creation;
transnational enterprise; leadership; communication.
1. INTRODUCTION
This
research is an analysis of conflict management in enterprises that have
developed global operating criteria and set subsidiaries in several regions due
to their expansion process, or to their search of cost reduction. Thus, the following
question is presented in this work: how does conflict at the transnational
enterprise located in Mexico make way to the entrepreneurial innovation as a
consequence of universalism-particularism non-compatibility?
This
particular case study is for the German exporting and manufacturing Industry
Company. The relevance of this work lies in the creation of a conceptual
framework that makes possible for the transnational enterprise in Mexico to
find it economically appealing to get involved in the community. Therefore,
reflecting its interest in a greater local investment, as compared to the
consideration of the location as a mere exporting launching pad. The proposed
research is aligned with the most recent studies, even more, it is placed at
the cutting edge of the current knowledge (Fritsch,
2015; Gasca; Torres, 2014; Guseynov; Fadhil, 2014; Katz, 2014; Marín; Stubrin;
Gibbons, 2014; Nistor, 2014; Trautwein; Körner, 2014; Esteinou, 2013; Posada,
2013; Porta, 2013; Romero, 2013; Muñoz, 2012; Vera-Vassallo, 2012). The
theoretical framework offers a model as a response to the research question
presented in this area.
1.1.
Theoretical
framework
The
mostly mentioned factor determining the decision of whether to invest abroad is
considered to be defined by transaction costs (Gaspar, 2015; Gasca; Torres, 2014; de la Garza, 2014; Gras, 2013;
Dunning, 1995). However, the localization decision is barely the principle
to achieve more profit. Every organization that expands internationally faces the
challenge of finding its way into a multicultural environment in which social
and economic factors are more complex. This is so mainly because of the country-specific
realities that are not very comprehensible for foreign officers or senior
managers, even for the most experienced ones.
In
the end, these factors have an impact on the transaction costs since they have
an influence on the decision-making efficiency. The impact is usually negative
when the senior manager only applies global rules without creating new
strategies that would allow him/her to adapt the organization to the new
reality. Rigidity in the decision-making prevents the company from getting
greater benefits, i.e. by increasing transaction costs of the establishment of
competence links with the town or locality (Martin;
Gonzalez, 2009; Gonzalez; Steggemann, 2013).
According
to Trompenaars (1998), the efficiency of an economic system depends on the
capacity to define and apply universal rules, while still accepting exceptions
to adapt to particular situations. ‘Universalism’ is the perception that a set
of ideas and practices can be applied everywhere without modifications (T).
‘Universalism’ goes beyond perception, derives in action and normalization of
what “must be” universal. In contrast, ‘particularism’ focuses on the
exceptional nature of current situations (T).
‘Particularism’
is the action and normalization of what “must be” in accordance to what is
specific. Circumstances show the adaptation of ideas and practices. The
universalism-particularism concept is fundamental to the decision making
process at senior levels, by management board officers or senior managers, and
furthermore it is important to the economy, as it can be seen in the works of
Durkheim (1912), Parsons (1951), Levy (1966), Seibel and Jaeger (1970); Seibel
(1973), Deal and Kennedy (1982), Schein and Mader, (1995), Hofstede (1997),
Trompenaars and Hampden (1998), Kras (2001), Robbins (2004), Lange and Manske
(2004), Jurado and Calderón (2006), Gundert and others (2011).
Following
the logic of Figure 1, the transaction costs for subsidiaries are mainly a
reflection of what the foreign manager does when becoming involved and
collaborating, either inside or outside the organization. Becoming involved
demands permanent negotiation along the process because in reality the
different objectives and perspectives of each economic agent lead to
non-compatibility.
The complementarity
comes from facing and transforming realities which are built toward the inner part
of the link (in-group) due to the non-compatibility between the participating
agents. In the case of the subsidiary, the officer is the one that needs to acknowledge
the way in which the relations are intertwined both inside and outside the
subsidiary, addressing the conflicts that may arise as an opportunity to build
new value in the face of complementarity.
In
face of a non-compatibility tensions arise. From tensions conflict comes up.
When the conflict is properly managed, consequently, it can have better results.
This is the main point of this analysis.
There
is a wide variety of definitions for ‘conflict’ in the theories that study the
causes and unfolding of conflicts. A wide vision is offered by Domínguez and
García (2003), Silva (2008) and Alexander (1990). In turn, several authors associate
the conflict with a non-compatibility when socializing or establishing links (Lee, 1964; Deutsch, 1973; Melucci &
Massolo, 1991; Nicholson, 1992; Ros & Schwartz, 1995; Ahlbrecht et
al., 2009).
Figure 1: Management in face of complementarity
because of non- compatibility issues
Source: Authors’ own elaboration
The
conflict unfolding process can be divided into three main stages: 1) potential
conflict, characterized by the existence of non-compatible goals; 2) latent
conflict, initiated by the perception of non-compatible goals among involved
groups or individuals, with their new escalated stages (Glasl, 2004); and 3) manifested conflict.
As
the model presented by figure 2 shows, each stage of the conflict matches a different
management modality. The management of internal conflicts – which are
frequently structural conflicts with an impact on the future economic value –
is a responsibility of management. Proactive management means getting ahead of
the conflict with a visionary process of change. Reactive management means that
the conflict can no longer be avoided or ignored, thus turning into a crisis.
Proactive or reactive actions are defined by the director’s culture and by
organizational multicultural background. During the potential phase of a
conflict and the transitional stage of a potential for a latent conflict, in
this research we talk about change management; a proactive visionary process,
while in the latent and manifested conflict stage, we talk about management of
a conflict under/in crisis and only as a reaction in face of what cannot be
avoided or ignored.
Figure 2: Conflict Management
Source: Authors’ own elaboration
In
the management of conflicts, the senior manager of the subsidiary faces the
challenge of identifying at which level of the scale is the conflict located
and what kind of conflict it is. In this way s/he can properly manage and
channel it towards innovation.
The
traditional management implies trying to minimize the destruction of
intellectual capital caused by a non-functional conflict that distorts the
phenomenon; furthermore, it entails trying to compulsively get to a win-lose
solution. In other words, conflict management implies trying to rescue the company
own economic value that has been lost due to the little will of cooperation among
the affected parties, as a result of the lack of administration ability to
manage the change (Steggemann, 2015).
It happens
only when there are negative effects for the reaching of financial aims. Whereas
conflict management allows channeling it in a positive way. Unfortunately, at
some companies, it is still a common practice to eliminate conflicts by making
authoritative decisions and not necessarily by channeling them towards
innovation. But as Ahlbrecht and others (2009) described, conflict cannot be
eliminated or overcome due to its endemic structure.
In
the management of change, as a prevention step, the most important thing is communication
that allows managing tensions and avoids the further unfolding of conflicts and
non-functional solutions for the objectives of the organizations. The
management of functional conflicts escalation, especially due to the tensions it
entails, is vital for organizations. Functional conflicts imply the generation,
maintenance and transference of behavioral patterns and cultural patterns to sustain
the latent model for future generations, this is what Parsons calls latency. (Steggemann, 2015)
At
the organizational level, structures are tied tensions. Such structures may be
rigid and require control in order to maintain what exists, and to exclude
those who oppose to them; indeed, this is what is called ‘latency’ in the
social system model of Parsons (1951). The result may be an authoritative and
bureaucratic decision making style, as Seibel describes (1970).
Overcoming
or eliminating conflicts by means of authoritative decisions, solves the
short-term problem, but destroys intellectual capital in the long term, thus
affecting the perception of those involved in organizational processes; what
Seibel (1970) calls performance orientation conflict. Therefore, conflicts
resolution in the organization by means of conversion of zero sum conflicts in
the ones of variable or positive sum generates, in addition to the added
economic value, an organizational culture of values with new perceptions of
people involved, a valuable resource for leaders to guide perception and action
while facing the change. (Steggemann,
2015)
These
functional conflicts with the tensions they imply, encourage innovation and
transformation in the organization, so that the company can successfully manage
its environment, get adapted to surroundings and adapt such surroundings to its
needs. It results in an environment where economic factors are allocated in resolving
and transforming reality, instead of adopting complex control processes to
identify who is guilty; that can only distract the organization from achieving
its goals. This kind of environment is the one that encourages innovative
spaces.
2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
One pilot
questionnaire was developed and applied in order to understand if decision
making at the subsidiary of a transnational enterprise operating in Mexico
tends to be more universalist or more particularist, and to address from there
the non-compatibility and its relationship with innovation.
This
tool intention was to measure particularist quality regardless of universalist
quality in analogy to Fincham’s studies (1997). The differentiation between
universalism and particularism as independent dimensions, allows the appearance
of two additional categories located in between those that are regularly scored
in the middle of a bipolar scale: those who achieve a high score both in
universalism and in particularism are ambivalent, while those that achieve a
low result in both of them can be described as indifferent.
It is
supposed that the quality of the administrative mechanism is a function of it being
oriented towards universalism or particularism. Thus, the quality of the
administrative mechanism, whether it is universalism or particularism oriented,
depends on the balance of both of them. In order to measure the attitude and to
get to know it well, it is necessary to know how much universalist or
particularist it is and make a balance between both of them.
By
measuring the balance one can see what kind of administrative mechanism the
analysed enterprises have. Based on who is a part of the body of officers or
directors, one can know how universalist, particularist, ambivalent (an ambivalent
perception of the administrative mechanism) or indifferent the subsidiary
is.
No tool
was found applied in previous studies to measure universalism regardless of
particularism of the key people in a company in terms of two separated dimensions
as Kaplan (1972) proposed. Therefore, a questionnaire was developed, modifying
the questions proposed in the studies of Trompenaars (1998), Nawojczyk (2006),
and Heumann (2010). The tool includes eight items developed for this research.
Table 1: Pearson Correlation about the pilot
questionnaire
Correlations |
|||||||||||
|
|
Item 1 |
Item 2 |
Item 3 |
Item 4 |
Item 5 |
Item 6 |
Item 7 |
Item 8 |
||
item1 |
Pearson Correlation |
1 |
.174 |
.106 |
.096 |
-.029 |
.107 |
-.063 |
.058 |
||
Fol. (bilateral) |
|
.200 |
.438 |
.482 |
.832 |
.434 |
.643 |
.670 |
|||
N |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
|||
item2 |
Pearson Correlation |
.174 |
1 |
.270* |
.270* |
-.287* |
-.168 |
-.331* |
-.077 |
||
Fol. (bilateral) |
.200 |
|
.044 |
.044 |
.032 |
.216 |
.013 |
.574 |
|||
N |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
|||
item3 |
Pearson Correlation |
.106 |
.270* |
1 |
.328* |
-.479** |
-.127 |
-.261 |
-.145 |
||
Fol. (bilateral) |
.438 |
.044 |
|
.014 |
.000 |
.349 |
.052 |
.288 |
|||
N |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
|||
Item4 |
Pearson Correlation |
.096 |
.270* |
.328* |
1 |
-.140 |
-.108 |
-.355** |
-.314* |
||
Fol. (bilateral) |
.482 |
.044 |
.014 |
|
.305 |
.428 |
.007 |
.018 |
|||
N |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
|||
item5 |
Pearson Correlation |
-.029 |
-.287* |
-.479** |
-.140 |
1 |
.268* |
.595** |
.147 |
||
Fol. (bilateral) |
.832 |
.032 |
.000 |
.305 |
|
.046 |
.000 |
.280 |
|||
N |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
|||
item6 |
Pearson Correlation |
.107 |
-.168 |
-.127 |
-.108 |
.268* |
1 |
.081 |
.210 |
||
Fol. (bilateral) |
.434 |
.216 |
.349 |
.428 |
.046 |
|
.552 |
.121 |
|||
N |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
|||
item7 |
Pearson Correlation |
-.063 |
-.331* |
-.261 |
-.355** |
.595** |
.081 |
1 |
.323* |
||
Fol. (bilateral) |
.643 |
.013 |
.052 |
.007 |
.000 |
.552 |
|
.015 |
|||
N |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
|||
Item8 |
Pearson Correlation |
.058 |
-.077 |
-.145 |
-.314* |
.147 |
.210 |
.323* |
1 |
||
Fol. (bilateral) |
.670 |
.574 |
.288 |
.018 |
.280 |
.121 |
.015 |
|
|||
N |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
56 |
|||
*. Correlation is significant at 0,5 level (bilateral). |
|||||||||||
**. Correlation is significant at 0,1 level (bilateral). |
|||||||||||
Source: Authors’ own elaboration based on the results
of the research project.
The
questionnaire was applied as a pilot test in two German subsidiaries located in
Mexico, at senior managers’ level. They followed the desirable rules at work.
Informers did not answer by saying ‘no’ although ‘no’ may have been true.
Participants answered in a universalist way, even when in fact they act in a
particularist way as Nawojczyk described (2006).
Those
who were interviewed answered the way it was socially desirable. The responses
given were the ones expected in the environment of the companies where they
work, and they tried to answer rationally; but rationality does not exist in
human beings a hundred per cent. Those who were interviewed are people working
at a German enterprise, which have to agree with a series of ‘issues’ inside
the company; therefore, they act as if they were uniformed.
To
ensure the instrument’s validity and reliability, a large sample is needed so
that it can produce a variance. Low variability of the responses showed that,
in statistical terms, it was a biased sample. This lead authors to the
enlargement of the sample, and all in all, variability did not change. The
matrix of correlations shows that questions apparently are not related to one
another.
Correlation
is too low among the items; with exception of the relationship between items 5
and 3 and items 5 and 7, which is anyway not highly significant (Table 1). This
implies relations that do not determine one another.
The
items that were applied are not organized, but rather mixed as a sample of the
matrix of rotated components (Table 2). This means that the items do not attain
to the definition of the concepts of universalism and particularism of this
research, and that one factor has not been clearly distinguished from the other
one. By analysing the items in detail, we can see that these are items of
social visibility and are hard to follow.
They
were originally designed by Trompenaars (1998), Nawojczyk (2006), and Heumann
(2010) for a bipolar analysis. However, the reality is not bipolar. The problem
is not about the definition of concepts based on logical models, but about the
approach to a reality in order to understand it. What is interesting, it is to
see how non-compatibility in face of universalism-particularism creates
tension, which, as time goes by, entails the conflict management for innovation
and, with it, value generation.
Table 2: Matrix of rotated components
Matrix of
rotated components |
||
n |
Components |
|
|
1 |
2 |
item1 |
-.223 |
.496 |
item2 |
-.618 |
.330 |
item3 |
-.708 |
-.137 |
Item4 |
-.247 |
-.588 |
item5 |
.820 |
.097 |
item6 |
.193 |
.590 |
item7 |
.781 |
.193 |
Item8 |
.008 |
.661 |
Extraction method: analysis of
main components. Rotation method: Varimax normalization with Kaiser. |
||
a. The rotation has converged
in three iterations. |
Source: Authors’ own elaboration based on the results
of the research project.
The
senior management team should fulfil the enterprise’s objective, regardless of
how much particularist or universalist the decisions taken may be. This could
lead to different circumstances in terms of universalism-particularism. If the
transnational enterprise proclaims universalism based decisions and at the
subsidiary particularism based decisions are made, a performance conflict
arises.
The
senior management team finds it convenient to make particular particularism based
decisions in order to create value, a greater competitiveness and
profitability; but at the same time, it could destroy some intangible value or
cause new unnecessary tensions at the operational level.
If,
in addition to the senior management team, employees understand the
decision-making process as a set of universal and particular rules, ambivalent
or indifferent perceptions are created. For very particularist employees and a
very particularist management, it seems that such conflict does not exist since
they are ‘set to the same channel’.
Such
coincidence is difficult to be found when we have a multicultural organization,
which is a part of a global enterprise with foreign capital; therefore, it is a
company with a long-term vision that exceeds its own local reality.
A
particularist management and an employee with a universalist background may cause a performance
conflict, e.g. by the means of employee experimenting that a higher performance
isn't necessarily giving as a result a greater reward due to particularist
decisions at the management level (Steggemann,
2015).
These
circumstances, implying complex and unique patterns, make the measurement task
for better understanding of the phenomenon, impossible. Under this analysis, we
resort at this stage of the research to a study of a concrete reality – a
critical case.
The
research took another turn for recovery and evidence analysis. This proof was
gathered through work meetings, minutes, reports and projects that could make
the decisions taken by the senior management team tangible; as well as their
impact on collaborators and on the results of the project. The analysis focused
on conflicts and tensions to find those facts subject to analysis that can
derive in a response to the question.
3. ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS
The Root Cause Analysis (RCA) is a structural and systemic tool to
locate flaws. RCA allowed identifying conflicts and tensions based on the
facts. For the goals of this research, it comprised three steps: data
collection, causing factors mapping and identification of the root cause (Rooney; Lee, 2004).
Figure 3. The Root Cause Analysis
Source: Authors’ elaboration based on Rooney & Lee
(2004)
The critical case is the implementation of a quality management system
(QMS) by means of a quality committee. Conflicts and tensions, involved in the
implementation of a quality management system, were identified at the
transnational subsidiary. During the research process, the coordination of the
project was selected, as well as it correspondence to the internal quality
committee and the external one with the person in charge of the project in
Germany.
To make sure that the collected data were correct, the senior manager of
the subsidiary was observed and interaction was held with him. Afterwards, information
was organized and mapped based on causing factors; analysing and contrasting
causes one by one based on the theoretical framework. Figure 3 shows the root
cause of what was observed, following the reversed causal sequence of events.
An increase in the number of customer complaints was observed (RNC) (32).
These complaints are related to an increase in the claims at the facilities
(31), which lead to delays (34). At the same time, tensions are observed
between the person in charge of the SGC implementation and area managers (35).
These tensions are derived from the delays and time extensions in the internal
processes of the company (34).
The delay that could be observed in the SGC implementation is not an
exception. SGC adaptation is not moving appropriately forward at the subsidiary
(37). Area audits have not improved from one year to the next (38). Delays,
poor audit results and a scarce participation of the senior management team, as
well as the interest in the SGC system expressed by the ones in charge of the
processes, lead to the same cause, which perceives SGC as a problem and not as
a useful supporting system.
The system of the company inhibits its structure change and intervene,
within the part of its environment that is not a part of the internal system or
of its working area, by creating a vacuum to protect itself, as the Integration
and Latency functions of the AGIL system of Parsons describe (Steggemann, 2015).
Figure 4: The Root Cause Analysis for the critical case
Source: Steggemann (2015) modified by the authors.
Function I is directed towards the integration of inner differences that
arise as a reaction to a changing environment by means of action patterns that
control and guarantee the system’s continuity. Function L is focused on the
formation and preservation of a system’s identity or its working area by means
of behavioural guidelines and rules that defend what already exists, thus
guaranteeing the systems continuity (Steggemann,
2015).
The aforementioned became visible with the introduction of the turtle
form, which shows the inputs and outputs of each department and makes evident
what people do or must do (38.) There is a confusion between working affairs and
personal affairs; the origin of a defensive behaviour is in a deficient inter
and intra departmental communication.
Mainly, the origin of deficient communication is related to the lack of
leadership at the company. There are few leaders and teams, and we can
frequently observe bosses and groups of work (28), where intra department work
is considered as necessary evil, similar to what had been seen in the previous
project. ‘It is the system that fails, not the person who leads the group’.
This kind of thought was developed due to a lack of clear and precise
delimitations of the responsibility and authority of each person in their
respective positions (26), focusing on products quality. In addition to
confusion between working and personal affairs, there are gaps that people take
over, or let others take over, depending on the circumstances.
This situation came up due to the lack of strategic objectives at departments
level. Most of the objectives of such departments are operational, they are a
part of their regular activity, they are internal, not strategic (27). This
comes from a lack of leadership and authority (25) from senior management,
visible due to the deficient participation at the quality committee of senior
management and the managers of each department (33) (Steggemann, 2015).
Senior level as well as department managers focus on delimiting and
separating (I and L) to protect their comfort zone and their generated
privileges (a significant challenge for those involved); instead of looking for
a balance of functions A, G, I and L of the Parsons scheme.
In other words, they should be searching for the balance between keeping
and transferring behaviour patterns (I) and stability (L) through the
organization, allowing at the same time the transformation of the organization
to adapt to its environment and vice versa (A) what could subsequently lead to
the achievement of its goals (G) of profitability and competitiveness (Steggemann, 2015).
The origin of orientation in delimitation and separation actions of a
part of the team of department and of senior level managers needs to be deducted
from the history of the company, from the established leadership forms, from
structures and from the existing limits of how things are done inside and
outside the organization, from its organizational culture (a weak
organizational culture in the part of the sales) visible because of staff
rotation and personnel’s seniority levels.
The system inhibits the change of its own structure and of the order of
links between formal and informal groups. It interposes within its environment (that
is not a part of the system), both boundaries and vacuums that are expressed through
intradepartmental conflicts, at times ignored. Involved groups perceive that
there is a significant challenge to protect their comfort zone and the
privileges they have. Operational and non-strategic objectives, in combination
with unclear goals, give as a result poorly committed working groups, whose
communication is limited to demands for information instead of developing communication
(Steggemann, 2015).
What happens in this case, as in the other ones analysed in the company,
is that they are focused on the elimination of mistakes during the final stage
of processes: manufacturing, project management, quality control. It was also
observed that, regarding control, conflicts and tensions must be rationally presented
at the middle of the way.
Figure 5. Project Control
Source: Steggemann (2015) modified by the authors.
The middle point is the representation of the conflict in figure 5. From
the beginning, the planning-doing-verifying-acting process is initiated. If
something unexpected is missing, people supervise the problem, take a lot of
time to understand or grasp the situation and act with a delay.
But if something is missing at the end of the project, it is not related
to the conflict. There can be seen the lack of total control. Thus, by the end
of the project, we talk about a total lack of control during the process. It is
the conflict evasion, a complementarity that is not in place there (Steggemann, 2015).
The observations of the project reflect what is expected, i.e. what is
founded by the theoretical framework. Action, games and conflict theories
already have a certain age and apparently, they explain a great part of the
observation; although Parsons did not work on the conflict. It can be that they
were studied a long time ago, and they may have been abandoned or are not
considered fashionable anymore; but it is a different question to consider them
not important any longer (Steggemann,
2015).
Some general traits can be identified from people interviewed and
observations based on the theoretical framework. These traits deserve more
attention to understand how complementarity is encouraged between
universalism-particularism in face of non-compatibility for reaching the aim of
innovation.
4. CONCLUSIONS
Broadening of horizons, thinking, feeling and interpreting reality in a
different way works as long as they are within the limits established by
society. Freedom exists within limits and rules (adaptation and latency). This
set creates a sense of community to separate itself from something. This set
allows also understanding in a context, within a reference framework. Crossing
the limits to innovate causes conflicts. Therefore, making transparent what
people do could cause non-favourable responses because it shows the
non-compatibility that could apparently block the complementarity of
universalism-particularism.
Transnational enterprises formally reflect a universal position to their
employees; regardless of their geographic location. They create standards,
bylaws and regulations that are intended to apply globally with the objective
of not losing control and integration of their subsidiaries spread around the
globe. However, during the day-to-day operations of each subsidiary,
individuals in it, even those who come from the original country of the
enterprise, are forced to take a combined stand where universalism and
particularism seem to merge.
Universalism and particularism definitely complement each other from the
moment in which the subsidiary involves people with different origins, visions
and backgrounds. Since the subsidiary is an open system, external agents
influence it as well. Socializing or relating, it creates tensions due to
multidimensional heterogeneity of economic agents. The acknowledgement of
tension and the possible management of conflicts arising from the
non-compatibility between universalism and particularism lead to a more
accurate decision making process. Furthermore, it leads to entrepreneurial
innovation.
The opposite situation only encourages the search for individual
interests, it discourages innovation and may lead to a competitiveness loss.
The dangerous part lies in the human tendency to search and keep the comfort
zone, regardless of how contradictory is this goal to manage a foreign
subsidiary.
Victimizing a strategist during a conflict blocks the capacity to
relearn from reality, thus innovating in the search of a greater value creation
for the enterprise. It is required to acknowledge the non-compatibility to have
more innovative enterprises, also to detect tensions, boost conflict and
channel it towards the improvement of the organization; instead of ignoring the
conflict or pretending to terminate it in an authoritative way.
This is a great challenge for senior management, given that they can
control the media that boost all of them, but they cannot control other
people’s emotions and feelings. When the conflict is managed through directing
it towards innovation, it entails the risk of
deviating it towards the emotional part, leaving aside the intellectual
conflict, which indeed does generate constructive changes to the subsidiary,
the transnational enterprise, senior management and for employees in general.
REFERENCES
Ahlbrecht, K; Bendiek, A.; Meyers R.; Wagner, S. (2007) Konfliktregelung und Friedenssicherung im
internationalen System. Hagen: Fernuniversität in Hagen, Fakultät für Kultur- und
Sozialwissenschaften.
Alexander, J. (1990) Las teorías sociológicas desde la segunda
guerra mundial. Barcelona: Gedisa.
De la Garza,
E. (2014) Empresas Trasnacionales, Discusiones Teóricas para su Estudio. Estrategias de relaciones laborales de las
grandes corporaciones, v. 8, n. 12, p. 5.
Deal, T.;
Kennedy, A. (1982) Corporate
cultures. The rites and
rituals of corporate life, Reading,
Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley
Deutsch, M. (1973) The
resolution of conflict: constructive and destructive processes. New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Domínguez, R.;
García, S. (2003) Introducción a la teoría
del conflicto en las organizaciones. España:
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos.
Dunning, J. (1995) Reappraising the eclectic paradigm in an age
of alliance capitalism. Austin: Journal
of International Business Studies, p. 461-491.
Durkheim, E. (1912) Le suicide. Étude de sociologie. Paris.
Esteinou, J. (2013) La
integración del Mercado Común Europeo-La transformación de los Medios de
Comunicación. Signo y
Pensamiento, v. 9, n. 17, p. 53-75.
Fritsch, S. (2015) Technological innovation, globalization, and
varieties of capitalism: the case of Siemens AG as example for contingent
institutional adaptation. Business
and Politics, v. 17, n. 1, p. 125-159.
Gasca, J.;
Torres, F. (2014) El control corporativo de la distribución de
alimentos en México. Problemas del
desarrollo, v. 45, n. 176, p. 133-155.
Gaspar, R.
(2015) Los desafíos al desarrollo urbano-regional en la economía global
contemporánea. Revista Urbano, v. 11,
p. 17, p. 50-56.
Glasl, F. (2004) Das Kontingenz-Modell der
Konfliktbehandlung. Alemania: Perspektive
Mediation, v. 1, n. 2, p. 82-87
González, T.;
Steggemann, M. (2013) Cooperación para la competitividad internacional:
caso crítico-atípico. In Gutiérrez, J.
S. (coord.) La arquitectura
financiera y desarrollo tecnológico para promover la competitividad, Universidad
de Guadalajara, México, p. 227-252
Gras, C.
(2013) Expansión agrícola y agricultura empresarial: el caso Argentino. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, n. 32, p.
73-92.
Gundert, H.;
Klinke, S.; Bliesner, A.; Nagler, B. (2011) Betriebliche
Vertrauenskulturen. Hintergrundpapier Landkarte RessourcenKultur. Ressourcen-Kultur Paper, 3.
Guseynov, A.; Fadhil, T. (2014) The main trends in the development of the
corporate innovation systems. Life
Science Journal, v. 11, n. 11s.
Hofstede, G. (1997) Cultures
and Organizations, London: McGraw-Hill.
Jurado, J.;
Calderón, G. (2006) Los dirigentes y el gobierno de las personas.
Argumentos Productivos, organizacionales y culturales. Revista Universidad Eafit, v.
42, n. 144, p. 34-50
Katz, C.
(2014) Discutiendo la mundialización. Razón
y Revolución, n. 5.
Kras, E.
(2001) La Administración Mexicana en
transición. México: Grupo Editorial Iberoamericana
Lange, H.;
Manske, F. (2004) Kultur – ärgerlicher Passepartoutbegriff oder
nützliche Kategorie der Gesellschaftsanalyse, in: Lange, H.; Manske, F. (coord.): Kultur im Verän-derungsprozess. Kultur als analytische Kategorie in der Arbeits- und Organisations-, der
Innovations- und Umweltforschun, p. 227-248. Baden-Baden: Neue
Verlagsgesellschaft
Lee, R. (1964) Religion and Social Conflict: An Introduction. Lee, R.; Marty, M. (coord.) Religion and Social Conflict. New York,
Oxford UP.
Levy, M. (1966) Modernization
and the structure of societies: A setting for international affairs (v. 1).
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Marín, A.; Stubrin,
L.; Gibbons, M. (2014) Construyendo capacidades tecnológicas en
escenarios inestables: empresas manufactureras argentinas y brasileñas. Revista de la CEPAL, n. 114, p.
163-182.
Martin, M.;
González, T. (2009) El vínculo empresarial en ausencia del mecanismo
de cooperación y su impacto en el desarrollo. El caso de la industria de la
confección mexicana, Revista Ciencias
Sociales, Chile, Universidad Arturo Prat de Iquique, n. 22
Melucci, A.;
Massolo, A. (1991) La acción colectiva como construcción social. Estudios Sociológicos, p. 357-364.
Muñoz, J.
(2012) Configuración organizativa de los Centros de Gobierno: Los casos de
Alemania y Ecuador. Tercer Encuentro
Anual de Sociedad Chilena de Políticas Públicas.
Nicholson, M.
(1992) Rationality and the analysis of
international conflict. v. 19. Cambridge: University Press.
Nistor, C. (2014) Firms transnationalization. Evolution of
multinational groups operating in Romania. SEA-Practical Application of Science, n. 5, p. 51-58.
Parsons, T.
(1951) El Sistema Social. Madrid:
Alianza Editorial.
Porta, F.
(2013) Trayectorias de cambio estructural y enfoques de política industrial.
ponencia presentada en el Seminario
Neoestructuralismo y economía heterodoxa, Santiago de Chile: Cepal.
Posada, E.
(2013) Regiones e infraestructura en la integración suramericana. Si Somos
Americanos, Revista de Estudios
Transfronterizos, v. 13, n. 2, p. 113-140.
Robbins, S. (2004) Comportamiento organizacional. México:
Pearson Educación.
Romero, A. (2013) El
entorno internacional. Revista
Tendencias, v. 1, n. 1.
Ros, M.;
Schwartz, S. (1995) Jerarquía de valores en países de la Europa
Occidental: Una comparación transcultural. Reis, p. 69-88.
Seibel, H.; Jaeger, W. (1970) Leistung und Konflikt. Soziale Welt, v. 21, n. 1, p. 55-72.
Seibel, H. (1973) Folgen des Leistungskonflikts in der
bürgerlichen Gesellschaft. Das
Ar-gument, v. 15, n. 3, p. 123-143.
Silva, G. (2008) La
teoría del conflicto. Un marco teórico necesario. Prolegómenos: derechos y valores, n. 22.
Schein, E.; Mader, F. (1995) Unternehmenskultur:
Ein Handbuch für Führungskräfte. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.
Steggemann,
M. (2015) Complementariedad entre
universalismo y particularismo en la empresa filial de la trasnacional alemana
ubicada en México, Thesi (PhD in Administration). Mexico: Universidad La
Salle.
Trautwein, H.;
Körner, F. (2014) German Economic Models, Transnationalization and
European Imbalances (n. 28/2014). ZenTra-Center
for Transnational Studies.
Trompenaars, F.; Hampden-Turner, Ch. (1998) Riding the waves of culture. Understanding cultural diversity in Business. México:
McGraw-Hill
Vera-Vassallo,
A. (2012) Tecnología, competitividad internacional y desarrollo productivo
de América Latina y el Caribe: algunas comparaciones con el Asia en desarrollo.
Economía, v. 18,
n. 35-36, p. 137-193.