Chapter 1 discusses eight critiques of international and cross-cultural research. Describe four of them.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

1. Questionable theoretical base: some critics argue that cross-cultural studies rely too much on
a small set of dimensions without capturing a broad view or accounting for variations within a
culture. Additionally, cross-cultural studies may emphasize differences among nations rather
than testing theories within a cross-cultural context.
2. Parochialism: Some domestic conclusions have been assumed to be universal, meaning that a
Western industrial model dominates when comparing cultures.
3. Samples that assume country homogeneity: Samples need to be interpretable so variables,
like organization type, hierarchical level, and demographic characteristics can be be taken into
account with methods such as using statistical controls.
4. Lack of relevance: Managers abroad may not have the same sense of the importance of
cross-cultural studies compared with managers in the United States.
5. Reliance on a single method: most research utilizes questionnaires given at a single point in
time, which may fail to account for the temporal aspect of cultural influence. A variety of
research methods would help scholars gain a broader understanding of cross-cultural
management.
6. Bias toward studying large companies: The vast majority of international and cross-cultural
studies have been conducted in the organizational context of large firms.
7. Reliance on a single organizational level: Researchers’ samples typically look only at
managers or skilled workers, rather than looking at multiple levels within an organizational
hierarchy.
8. Limited to a small number of locations: Most studies have been done in a small number of
western European countries, Japan, and recently, China. Little research has been done in the
Middle East, Africa, and Latin America.