Introduction
Several interlocking developments fostered the rise of cross-cultural management (CCM) research from a positivist perspective in the first half of the twentieth century pertaining to society, the political, economic and business sphere, as well as to the scientific community. With technological developments in transportation, travel became easier and several waves of migration and immigration, mainly due to economic and political reasons, led to a multicultural workforce in the United States with different kinds of value orientations underlying the common quest for a new and promising future. The long period of peace after Napoleon's wars and the beginning of World War I had resulted in flourishing inter- and multinational trade with Europe accounting for almost two-thirds of global trade and even more of global investments, which had grown 20 times between 1855 and 1914 (Stevenson, 2014).
Hence, curiosity in different and especially foreign peoples had grown. Around 1800, Wilhelm von Humboldt coined the term Völkerpsychologie (folk psychology) and the social scientist Wilhelm Wundt later set out to study the laws of development of language, myths and mores across peoples including the arts, history, society, law and culture (Wundt, 1900-1920/2015). With his quest for discovering general laws, Wundt conducted research from a positivist perspective, which had become increasingly popular in the social sciences as a method of inquiry after the scientific and industrial revolutions. The natural sciences had set the standards for conducting good research and many social scientists adopted these standards as best research practice in their quest to predict behavior and develop universal laws in their respective domains of study, assuming that social reality is objectively given.
Two world wars left European countries destroyed and brain-drained, citizens exhausted, and, after World War II, the center of economic power shifted from Europe to the United States, accounting for 75 percent of the world's GNP (Thurow, 1988). As a victorious power, the United States recognized both business opportunities and the political importance of rebuilding defeated nations with the Marshall Plan as a bulwark against communism. Hence, the United States originated management ideologies and models based on a predominant functionalist and positivist view were exported to other countries (Boyacigiller, Kleinberg, Phillips, & Sackmann, 2004). In their comparative study, Haire, Ghiselli, and Porter (1966) tried to shed light on the link between values and managerial attitudes and behaviors in different countries with a focus on managerial attitudes. Different groups of North American researchers, funded by the government-friendly Ford Foundation, started to study and compare economic development and systems of management in a multi-year, multi-country study (Westwood & Jack, 2008).
These early research efforts considered culture an independent variable â or often a residual â and equated culture with nation. One exception in this early positivist stream of CCM research was the study on variations of value orientations by a group of anthropologists and social psychologists (Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961) influenced and informed by the ethnologist C. Kluckhohn (1951). Their work on societal values informed the research of Hofstede (1980) and other CCM researchers.
This chapter addresses first the major characteristics of positivist CCM research before discussing selected streams of research. Given their influence on the field, the work of Hofstede (1980, 2001), the GLOBE project, the European Value Studies and World Values Survey, as well as the value research by Schwartz (1992, 1994), are chosen as examples of positivist CCM research highlighting the contributions and limitations of positivist CCM research. Contextual challenges and ways to move forward are discussed before drawing some conclusions.
Characteristics of Positivist CCM Research
Positivist CCM studies share several commonalities, being rooted in a functionalist paradigm (Burrell & Morgan, 1979). As âthe set of common beliefs and agreements shared between scientists about how problems should be understood and addressedâ (Kuhn, 1996), a paradigm influences researchersâ assumptions about reality, their questions, and their choices of what they consider appropriate ways for studying them, including the research design and methodology. Positivism assumes that social reality is objectively given and can be understood by systematic, empirical observation with the aim to discover the general/universal laws of certain aspects of a particular society or social group. The goal of this type of research is to explain and predict behavior while observing issues of validity and reliability, the latter being critical for comparisons and replication (Donaldson, 2003).
Positivist research in the field of CCM is also sometimes referred to as etic (van Oudenhoven, 2017) â researchers remain outside observers to their research setting; they try to be neutral and objective experts collecting data for their specific research purpose. Data collected are analyzed using different kinds of statistical analyses and reported to the research community.
Because of its large scope and complex nature, positivist CCM research tends to be a multinational, multidisciplinary research team ...