up allowed German companies to follow a strategy of ‘differentiated quality
production’, combining rational industrial manufacture with quality and cus-
tomization of products and services. The trade unions then joined the band-
wagon, seeing that this produced lots of skilled workers, and this gave them a
more secure membership clientele than a system bringing forth greater numbers
of less skilled workers and white collar staff. On the other hand, the culturalists
will say that German culture places high esteem on well-trained specialists with
transferable skills, as indispensable elements in a ‘well-oiled machine’, which
can even go on working smoothly when managers and engineers neglect its
maintenance. From this perspective, it is the combination of the Hofstedian
dimensions of ‘Uncertainty Avoidance’ (doing things systematically to prevent
accidents, defects and confusion) ‘low Power Distance’ (technicians and engineers
respecting workers’ experience and having shared it as far as possible) and
‘Masculinity’ (work, getting stuck into it and comradeship as central interests
in life) that explains this phenomenon. Chapter 6 discusses the position of
Germany in the mapping of Hofstede’s work-related values.
Is it culture or institutions that determine what goes on? First, do not look
at any explanation as being deterministic. The conflict between institutional-
ism and culturalism, and related claims that one of them or the other is at the
root of things, is nothing but an academic job creation program. Second, link
differentiated theoretical perspectives. Only this will lead to a satisfactory
analysis. Happily, this is where the theoretically sophisticated scholar and the
down-to-earth management or business student or practitioner meet.
A brief primer on culturalismFor the moment, though, let us separate the institutionalist and culturalist
approaches for the purpose of discussion, but do keep their eventual unification in
mind. First, what does it imply to focus on the actor? Actors are human individu-
als or a whole collection of individuals. They can be defined either by common
characteristics (quasi-groups) or by integrated social interaction. Individual and col-
lective actors typically feature what may be called a ‘programming of the mind’
(including everything from articulate or tacit knowledge to emotions, gut reac-
tions, moral standards and rules-of-thumb). All these characteristics arise from
socialization processes which are similar for members of the same group.
Individuals may react in different ways to these processes, but even when they do,
they share a common perspective which provides guidelines for acceptable
responses. There are various possible commonalities that can be imagined: early
childhood socialization may have a distinctive pattern in a society; education and
school experiences differ from one country to the next; working careers are also dif-
ferent, exerting a socializing influence on the human mind even though they are
not necessarily labeled as education or training. In every example, a socialization
120 International Human Resource Management