(i) Global vs. Local Tensions. It has been shown convincingly that managers in dif-
ferent environments not only have different ways of analyzing and resolving prob-
lems but also different information needs on which they base business decisions. This
creates a fundamental dilemma for global companies: managers at headquarters are
likely to want different decision information than managers in the region or the local
country use. Not only this, but the basis for decision making may be fundamentally
different. This points out one of the difficulties of using common systems across a
global company.
(ii) Cultural Differences. A heterogenous cultural environment makes it more diffi-
cult to share common resources among units. It means products and IT applications
require extensive customization to accommodate language and currency differences,
for example. There is some evidence, however, that both workers and customers are
becoming more alike and that cultural distinctions are lessening through the homog-
enization of needs and desires as a result of global communication (e.g., TV, Inter-
net, and fax) and travel.
Distinctions also exist in styles of systems development. For example, Ives and
Jarvenpaa report,
that the French were skilled in data modeling and in the more theoretical aspects of sys-
tems development. Other interviewees reported the English to be well trained in the use
of structured development methodologies, while the Germans were seen as excellent
project managers. Singaporeans were described by one interviewee as extremely hard
working, skilled, and willing to take on any task assigned. Another manager described
them as the consultants of Asia. Australia, on the other hand, was seen as lacking in sys-
tems skills.^13(iii) Headquarters–Region–Subsidiary Relations. The primary tension between head-
quarters and subsidiaries is over controlandintegration.Subsidiaries desire to act lo-
cally so that they can better meet the needs of their (local) customers. In more gen-
eral terms, organizations must maintain freedom of action when faced with
challenges in their environment—threats from competitors or market opportunities,
for example. The subsidiary is itself a complex organization and if every action must
be cleared with a higher level, reaction time is slowed and resources are wasted in
endless communication. Headquarters, thinking more globally, wants commonalty
and conformity among its subsidiaries—a nice, neat structure. For them the challenge
is to successfully integrate subsidiaries into the larger organization. This integration
becomes more complex as the number of different subsidiaries (breadth) and their
scope (diversity) increases.
(iv) Alignment of Business and IT Strategies. One of the most difficult challenges
faced by firms, whether or not operating globally, is the alignmentof their IT and
business strategies. The goal should be that the IT strategy is consistent with and
supports the business strategy. Thus, a globally integrated firm should follow either
a coordinated global operation strategy or a cooperation strategy (see section that
follows).
28 • 10 INTERNATIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS(^13) Ives and Jarvenpaa, 1991, p. 45.