Culture is the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one

group from another. Culture can be defined either by a set of observable behaviors or by the
underlying values that drive behavior. In large organizations, vision statements, mission
statements and statements of values are often formalized to describe the company’s culture.

Reasons for understanding culture:-

1) Business:  Geert Hofstede’s excellent book on culture is written not primarily out of
academic theory, but out of his study of the practical problems faced by one particular
modern corporation (IBM), which exists across national and cultural boundaries. An
American boss will find that relations with Saudi employees will become strained and
difficult if she or he simply treats them as though they were Americans. In the world we live
in, understanding culture in general and also specific individual cultures in particular can
make the difference between success and failure in the global market and economy.

2) Politics and Diplomacy: If your career goal involves anything that relates to international
politics and diplomacy, then understanding other cultures is important. Often as Americans
we only acknowledge the existence of other societies and nations with their very different
values, beliefs, ideologies and interests, when it comes to the point of some sort of crisis or
perhaps even war. A better way is to seek to understand other nations and cultures before
things come to a crisis.

 3) Religious and Social Work:  If you are either a religious believer or simply a
conscientious world citizen, you may decide at some point in your life to become involved in
some form of relief effort or church mission trip.. Many well-intentioned people from North
America and Western Europe have gone to other cultures hoping to offer a helping hand of
some sort. Often, because of a failure to understand the local situation and culture adequately,
what began as well-meaning charity has become something not only less-than-helpful, but
actually harmful. Understanding other cultures is a key to avoiding such mistakes.

4) Neighbors: if none of the above are motivating, your colleagues from different country
might motivate you to learn about their cultures.

Cultural values of a new country can make or break the business. It decides if the type
of business is suited for the people or not. Without understanding the culture of a country a
business should not venture into that market.

Take an example of TGIF restaurant which has now become international by setting up
its business in India. They have opened more than 40 restaurants across India which includes
all the important cities. Their main aim was not to cater to the American tourists obviously
but to cater to the local crowd as well. India is a Hindu dominated country that does not eat
beef. Also, India is a country that has all the major religions and Muslims do not eat pork.
Most of the food served in these restaurants contains only lamb or chicken and not the other
kind of meats. They have to do this for respecting the country’s cultural views.

Culture serves several purposes for the local community and defines what they wear,
eat and how they run their lives. A product or service should encumber all their values and
only then will it be accepted. Having insight into the cultural dynamics of a country or region
can be very helpful to understand why people act the way they do, and the appropriate way
you should act while in that country.
World Business Culture
When working in the global commercial environment, knowledge of the impact of cultural
differences is one of the keys to international business success. Improving levels of cultural
awareness can help companies build international competencies and enable individuals to
become more globally sensitive. 
Matching individuals to organizations is a crucial part of success for any company.
The match between people and the companies for which they work is determined by the kind
of organizational culture that exists. The degree to which an organization’s values match the
values of an individual who works for the company determines whether a person is a good
match for a particular organization.
The collective rules by which an organization operates define its culture. These rules
are formed by shared behaviors, values and beliefs. Culture forms the basis for how
individuals operate within the context of the organization. The way a group or individual
behaves, defines what is “normal” and sanctions what is not normal is determined by his or
her culture.
On the most basic level, culture is observable as a set of behaviours.
examples of culture at this level include the degree of formality with which employees
conduct themselves, the organization’s dress code, and the type of technology used. Beneath
the level of observable behaviors are the values that underlie behavior. Though these values
determine behavior, they cannot be directly observed. At an even deeper level are the
assumptions and beliefs that determine values. While an organization or individual’s values
may remain within awareness and can be stated, assumptions and beliefs often exist beneath
the surface and out of conscious awareness. Being aware of an organization’s culture at all
levels is important because the culture defines appropriate and inappropriate behavior. In
some cultures, for example, creativity is stressed. In others, the status quo is valued. Some
cultures are more socially oriented, while others are task-oriented, “business only”
environments. In some company’s teamwork is key. In other’s, individual achievement is
encouraged and valued. An organization’s culture also determines the way in which
employees are rewarded. Management tends to focus on a dominant source of motivation,
such as pay, status, or opportunity for personal growth and achievement. The accessibility of
management and the ways in which decisions are made are reflections of an organization’s
culture as well.
It is important for individual values to match organizational culture because a culture
of “shared meaning or purpose” results in actions that help the organization achieve a
common or collective goal. An organization will operate more productively as a whole when
key values are shared among the majority of its members. To that end, employees need to be
comfortable with the behaviors encouraged by the organization so that individual motivation
and group productivity remain high. High functioning organizations are comprised of
individuals whose overt behaviors are consistent with their covert values.
All of this is of crucial importance to managers. Senior executives usually set the tone by
exerting core values that form the overall dominant culture shared by the majority of an
organization’s members. So, if management does not take the time to understand the culture
that motivates an organization, problems are inevitable.

New procedures and activities will be very difficult to implement if they do not mesh with the
organization’s culture.
Being aware of an organization’s culture at all levels is important because the culture defines
appropriate and inappropriate behavior. In some cultures, for example, creativity is stressed.
In others, the status quo is valued. Some cultures are more socially oriented, while others are
task-oriented, “business only” environments. In some company’s teamwork is key. In other’s,
individual achievement is encouraged and valued. An organization’s culture also determines
the way in which employees are rewarded. Management tends to focus on a dominant source
of motivation, such as pay, status, or opportunity for personal growth and achievement. The
accessibility of management and the ways in which decisions are made are reflections of an
organization’s culture as well.
It is important for individual values to match organizational culture because a culture
of “shared meaning or purpose” results in actions that help the organization achieve a
common or collective goal. An organization will operate more productively as a whole when
key values are shared among the majority of its members. To that end, employees need to be
comfortable with the behaviors encouraged by the organization so that individual motivation
and group productivity remain high. High functioning organizations are comprised of
individuals whose overt behaviors are consistent with their covert values.
All of this is of crucial importance to managers. Senior executives usually set the tone by
exerting core values that form the overall dominant culture shared by the majority of an
organization’s members. So, if management does not take the time to understand the culture
that motivates an organization, problems are inevitable. New procedures and activities will be
very difficult to implement if they do not mesh with the organization’s culture. An effective
means of keeping employees aligned with the values and goals of an organization is by
developing a culture that encourages employees to focus on a higher purpose for their work.
are basically, good, rational and interested in achievement. Leaders that unify an organization
believe that everyone has something to contribute to the organization and decision-making
should involve people at all levels within the organization.
Creating an environment where people enjoy and value their work is key. To do this
effectively, leaders must be sure to communicate clear expectations for every member of the
organization. These expectations should be supported by the words and actions of managers
who regularly let people know how their work is important to the organization. Individuals
should be given assignments that are consistent with their strengths and interests, and
opportunities for continued learning and growth should be provided as well.
The importance of understanding organizational culture cannot be overlooked. The bottom
line for managers who want to create a culture of success is to start with creating a positive
environment. Bring in people whose values are in line with the organization’s culture, and
continue to acknowledge success and involve the whole organization in maintaining an
environment that allows people to enjoy working hard to meet the company’s goals.

Organizational culture is a set of psychology, attitudes, experiences, beliefs and values

(personal and cultural values) of an organization. It has been defined as "the specific
collection of values and norms that are shared by people and groups in an organization and
that control the way they interact with each other and with stakeholders outside the
organization.

Organizational culture and corporate culture are often used interchangeably but it is a mistake
to state that they are different concepts. All corporations are also organizations but not all
organizations are corporations. Organizations include religious institutions, not-for-profit
groups, and government agencies. Corporations are organizations and are also legal entities. .
Corporate culture is the total sum of the values, customs, traditions, and meanings that
make a company unique. Corporate culture is often called "the character of an organization",
since it embodies the vision of the company’s founders. The values of a corporate culture
influence the ethical standards within a corporation, as well as managerial behavior.

Senior management may try to determine a corporate culture. They may wish to impose
corporate values and standards of behavior that specifically reflect the objectives of the
organization. In addition, there will also be an extant internal culture within the workforce.
Work-groups within the organization have their own behavioral quirks and interactions
which, to an extent, affect the whole system.

Corporate culture has become increasingly important to firms in the past 20 years. Despite its
intangible nature, its role is meaningful, affecting employees and organizational operations.
And while culture is not the only factor guaranteeing success, positive cultures offer
significant competitive advantages over rivals.

Dominant set of norms 

People come from diverse social, cultural and ethnic backgrounds, with different
personalities and experiences. In a work environment, these factors manifest themselves in a
wide variety of ways, and over time a dominant set of norms arise which guide the way work
is accomplished.

Corporate culture has many definitions as it is heavily influenced by the industry in which it
operates, geographical location, history, employee personalities, etc. Some formal definitions
have arisen, but essentially a corporate culture has several key elements: it offers a clear
corporate vision; it is supported by corporate values consistent with the aims of the company
and aligned with the personal values of organization members; a high value is placed on
employees at all levels and there is extensive employee interaction across many levels; and
the culture is adaptable, adjusting to external conditions, and consistent, treating all
employees equally and fairly. These characteristics cannot exist without widespread
employee support. And even though there may be strong sub-cultures within the company,
the dominant culture must be strong enough for sub-culture members to embrace it.
Cultural benefits 
Organizations able to maintain positive cultures enjoy many benefits. Morale is improved,
and the work environment more enjoyable, with increased teamwork, openness to new ideas
and sharing of information. This activates learning and continuous improvement because of
the free flow of information. It also helps attract and retain good employees.
Examples of companies benefiting from the positive effects of corporate culture include:
• Wal-Mart. Founder Sam Walton’s concern and respect for staff from the foundation of the
company creates an environment of trust that persists to this day. Walton met staff, calling
them by their first name and encouraged change to maintain the competitive edge. To this
day, staff think about “how Sam would have done it”. 
• Southwest Airlines. Its relaxed culture can be traced back to unconventional CEO Herb
Kelleher, who encourages informality and wants staff to have fun at their jobs. Employees are
valued, with Kelleher acknowledging births, marriages and deaths by notes and cards. Staff
are encouraged to pitch in and help out, especially at check-in, giving Southwest turnaround
times less than half the industry average. 
• Hewlett Packard. Problems several years ago encouraged HP to change its culture; staff are
required to formulate three personal and three professional goals each year, and are
encouraged to cheer those that meet them, such as getting away early to be with family. Two
years into the program, HP reports no loss in productivity despite staff working shorter hours
and there is an increased staff retention rate. The program has been marked by the extent to
which managers bought in, and modeled it in their personal lives. 
It is obviously easier to model a corporate culture during a firm’s infancy, but in practice
culture can be changed for the better. This can be done by surveying employees, meeting
staff outside their departments and learning what they really think is going on. This helps
managers identify the existing culture and identify areas of improvement.
Then, managers should institute cultural change by modeling the behavior they wish to
encourage, then reinforce the desired culture with visionary statements/slogans, celebrating
employees’ successes or promotions, distributing newsletters, hiring culture-compatible staff,
etc.
Positive corporate culture is now a prerequisite for success rather than a competitive
advantage; it allows the hiring and retention of top-quality staff. Ideally established at a
company’s infancy, it can be changed over time as the authors’ example show. If a corporate
culture is lowering morale, a top-down approach is needed, setting out the vision from the top
and demonstrating acceptable behavior. Improving workplace culture makes employees’
experience happier and this in turn leads to improved profitability (or, in the HP example, no
reduction in profitability!).
A well-structured study, combining a sound theoretical base with three case studies involving
corporate culture change in top US companies, the article is of use both to academics and
managers as it charts the concept of corporate culture and its positive and negative effects on
organizations.

Gerard Hendrik Hofstede (born 3 October 1928, Haarlem) is an

influential Dutch organizational sociologist, who studied the interactions
between national cultures and organizational cultures. He is also an author of several books
including Culture's Consequences[1] and Cultures and Organizations, Software of the Mind,
co-authored with his son Gert Jan Hofstede.[2] Hofstede's study demonstrated that there are
national and regional cultural groupings that affect the behaviour of societies and
organizations, and that these are persistent across time.

Hofstede has found five dimensions of culture in his study of national work related values.
Replication studies have yielded similar results, pointing to stability of the dimensions across
time. The dimensions are:

 Small vs. large power distance

How much the less powerful members of institutions and organizations expect and
accept that power is distributed unequally. In cultures with small power distance
(e.g. Australia, Austria,Denmark, Ireland, Israel, New Zealand), people expect and
accept power relations that are more consultative or democratic. People relate to one
another more as equals regardless of formal positions. Subordinates are more
comfortable with and demand the right to contribute to and critique the decisions of
those in power. In cultures with large power distance (e.g. Malaysia), the less
powerful accept power relations that are autocratic or paternalistic. Subordinates
acknowledge the power of others based on their formal, hierarchical positions.
Thus, Small vs. Large Power Distance does not measure or attempt to measure a
 culture's objective, "real" power distribution, but rather the way people perceive
power differences.
 Individualism vs. collectivism

How much members of the culture define themselves apart from their group
memberships. In individualist cultures, people are expected to develop and display
their individual personalities and to choose their own affiliations.
In collectivist cultures, people are defined and act mostly as a member of a long-term
group, such as the family, a religious group, an age cohort, a town, or a profession,
among others. This dimension was found to move towards the individualist end of the
spectrum with increasing national wealth.
 Masculinity vs. femininity

The value placed on traditionally male or female values (as understood in most
Western cultures). In so-called 'masculine' cultures, people (whether male or female)
value competitiveness,assertiveness, ambition, and the accumulation of wealth and
material possessions. In so-called 'feminine' cultures, people (again whether male or
female) value relationships and quality of life. This dimension is often renamed by
users of Hofstede's work, e.g. to Quantity of Life vs. Quality of Life. Another reading
of the same dimension holds that in 'M' cultures, the differences between gender roles
are more dramatic and less fluid than in 'F' cultures; but this strongly depends on other
dimensions as well.
 Weak vs. strong uncertainty avoidance

How much members of a society are anxious about the unknown, and as a
consequence, attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty. In cultures
with strong uncertainty avoidance, people prefer explicit rules (e.g. about religion and
food) and formally structured activities, and employees tend to remain longer with
their present employer. In cultures with weak uncertainty avoidance, people prefer
implicit or flexible rules or guidelines and informal activities. Employees tend to
change employers more frequently.
Michael Harris Bond and his collaborators subsequently found a fifth dimension which was
initially called Confucian dynamism. Hofstede later incorporated this into his framework as:

 Long vs. short term orientation

A society's "time horizon," or the importance attached to the future versus the past
and present. In long term oriented societies, people value actions and attitudes that
affect the future: persistence/perseverance, thrift, and shame. In short term oriented
societies, people value actions and attitudes that are affected by the past or the
 present: normative statements, immediate stability, protecting one's own face, respect
for tradition, and reciprocation of greetings, favors, and gifts.
These cultural differences describe averages or tendencies and not characteristics of
individuals. A Japanese person for example can have a very low 'uncertainty avoidance'
compared to a Filipino person even though their 'national' cultures point strongly in a
different direction. Consequently, a country's scores should not be interpreted as
deterministic.
Criticism of the Framework

Hofstede's conceptualization of culture as static and essential has attracted some criticism. In

a recent article in the Academy of Management's flagship journal, The Academy of
Management Review, Galit Ailon deconstructs Hofstede's book Culture's Consequences by
mirroring it against its own assumptions and logic[3]. Ailon finds several inconsistencies at the
level of both theory and methodology and cautions against an uncritical reading of Hofstede's
cultural dimensions.
Hofstede's work has also been criticized by researchers who think that he identifies cultures
with nations based on the supposition that within each nation there is a uniform national
culture, a suggestion explicitly denied by Hofstede himself in chapter 1 of 'Cultures and
Organizations'. According to Hofstede, the point about culture is precisely its resilience to
change in spite of all this flux.

The Geert Hofstede analysis for India shows a large power distance society and all other
measures are relatively moderate. This would be indicative of the fact that India is in the
midst of change. The traditional caste systems has been outlawed, however the large power
distance score indicates that the attitudes still remain.

India has Power Distance (PDI) as the highest Hofstede Dimension for the culture, with a
ranking of 77 compared to a world average of 56.5. This Power Distance score for India
indicates a high level of inequality of power and wealth within the society. This condition is
not necessarily subverted upon the population, but rather accepted by the population as a
cultural norm.

India's Long Term Orientation (LTO) Dimension rank is 61, with the world average at 48. A
higher LTO score can be indicative of a culture that is perseverant and parsimonious.

India has Masculinity as the third highest ranking Hofstede Dimension at 56, with the world
average just slightly lower at 51. The higher the country ranks in this Dimension, the greater
the gap between values of men and women. It may also generate a more competitive and
assertive female population, although still less than the male population.

India's lowest ranking Dimension is Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI) at 40, compared to the
world average of 65. On the lower end of this ranking, the culture may be more open to
unstructured ideas and situations. The population may have fewer rules and regulations with
which to attempt control of every unknown and unexpected event or situation, as is the case
in high Uncertainty Avoidance countries.
 steps to ensure that individual are responsive to the goals and operating procedure of the
organization start with the hiring process. Managers can foster the development of a positive
culture by employing people who share the same values and vision that the organization
represents. To do this, employers can spend time with prospects before they enter the
organization as new employees. Once new hires are indoctrinated with the organization’s
values, they will form an objective perception of the environment that will solidify the
organization’s personality or culture.
In addition to hiring people who fit the organization, managers need to have a solid
understanding of the dynamics of culture and how to transform it so that they can direct
activities in a manner that gets results. Some ways to continually transmit the culture of an
organization in a productive way include telling stories, having corporate “rituals,” and using
symbolic language when referring to the organization’s mission. Firm-sponsored social
events and mentorship programs may be effective as well.
Having a positive and aligned culture benefits the organization in many ways. One
important benefit is a high level of productivity. The destructive influence of hiring someone
who does not share the same set of values, goals and commitment espoused by the
organization will weaken a strong chain of links and bonds. An employee’s performance
depends on what is and what is not proper among his or her peers, which in turn affects that
individual’s behavior and motivation to participate and contribute within the organizational
framework.
Indian context
Behavior 

  The head is considered the seat of the soul. Never touch someone else’s head, not even to pat the
hair of a child.

  Beckoning someone with the palm up and wagging one finger can be construed as in insult.
Standing with your hands on your hips will be interpreted as an angry, aggressive posture.

  Whistling is impolite and winking may be interpreted as either an insult or a sexual proposition.

  Never point your feet at a person. Feet are considered unclean. If your shoes or feet touch another
person, apologize.

  Gifts are not opened in the presence of the giver. If you receive a wrapped gift, set it aside until the
giver leaves.

  Business lunches are preferred to dinners. Hindus do not eat beef and Muslims do not eat pork.

Communications 

  There are more than fourteen major and three hundred minor languages spoken in India. The
official languages are English and Hindi. English is widely used in business, politics and education.

  The word "no" has harsh implications in India. Evasive refusals are more common, and are
considered more polite. Never directly refuse an invitation, a vague "I’ll try" is an acceptable refusal.

  Do not thank your hosts at the end of a meal. "Thank you" is considered a form of payment and
therefore insulting.

Titles are very important. Always use professional titles.

Culture mapping

A cultural audit to offer a clearer view of the culture you are dealing with. This knowledge is used to
aid the diagnostics process, ensure that an appropriate change methodology is applied and test the
viability of any solutions.

This is clearly an art as opposed to a science. An organisation’s culture is simply an approximate

description of the preferred style that the people choose to use. At best, the outcome of any audit
must be treated with some skepticism and at worse treated on a par with a daily horoscope. However,
it is fair to say that, in general, it is possible to get a feel for a culture even if it cannot be specifically
calibrated. A simple test is to walk into the foyer of three different hotels. There is every chance that
within a few minutes, you will have an intuitive grasp of the culture of the organisation. You will be
able to guess what is acceptable to the staff, who wields the power and the extent to which the
organisation has verve and energy. Although you would not invest your money on the strength of
this, it can offer enough data on which to make a number of broad suppositions about an
organisation’s operating style.

It can help to think of an organisation as an empty canvass that has been painted with a varied
mix of different attributes. Like the artist who slowly builds up a picture, often not knowing quite how
it will end up, as an organisation grows it adopts a range of different cultural attributes. When
investigating the make-up of the picture, the consultant’s role is to deconstruct the colour base and
understand how the way they have been mixed contributes to the end picture. Just consider what a
varied mix of pictures an artist can create from a simple range of colours. In the same way, although
each organisation will be unique, it is essentially made up from the same set of cultural attributes
explained in more detail below:

Artefacts - Physical evidence left in the wake of human interaction that can help to
indicate a particular cultural bias. This can include rituals, behavioural norms, shared
language, reward systems, logos and office design.
Beliefs - What does the organisation value and regard as being important? This is
seen in the moral and ethical codes offered by the business. The difficulty is that
beliefs are deeply personal things, so in trying to define them at a global level,
averaging or levelling will occur and some degree of compromise can take place.
Control - Is power based around the structure of the organisation or capability of the
individual? To what extent does this leverage negative or positive political action
within the organisation?
Discourse - What is the balance between the open and hidden elements within the
business? To what extent will people open up and talk about issues in a shared
environment and to what extent are issues held for debate in private, closed and
secure groups? This gap between the open and hidden levels of discourse can be used
to understand the difference between the espoused and actual cultural factors.
Energy - Where is the energy expended? Is it on issues that are concerned with
internal processes or is it externally orientated, where the primary focus is on the
customers, suppliers and stakeholders?
Flow - How do people move in, out and within the organisation? What is the
accepted churn rate, what is the balance between formal and informal recruitment
processes and why do people leave the business?
Generative - To what extent does the organisation understand and drive its
capability to innovate and learn? Do individuals feel that they are empowered to
develop themselves? To what extent is knowledge shared between individuals and
what infrastructure exists to facilitate the sharing of knowledge?

However, culture is dynamic and unpredictable, hence dissecting an organisation at any time,
region or level will produce a range of varying ideas and themes, some of which align while others
conflict. Any cultural analysis can only offer a subjective snapshot and should never be treated as the
definitive model of an organisation’s style of interaction.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR
The decision to offshore is often treated as a strictly financial one and because of this HR may not
always be involved in the decision-making process of whether to offshore. Frequently HR is only
brought in to take over the management of the offshoring process once the decision has already been
made. Because the decision to offshore is so tied to both the people management practices of the
organization and the morale of the existing U.S.-based workforce, it is important for HR to be
involved in this strategic decision-making process. 
HR is a critical player in the information-gathering process that helps to determine the business
impact of offshoring. Assessing structural challenges that may pose difficulties in maintaining
consistency across all operations, the level of control the business must be able to maintain over
projects and the existing infrastructure of both the country, company and in some cases foreign
contractors, as well as potential future changes within a country's economic or political climate are
all responsibilities that may fall to HR.
Economic trends are particularly important indicators to watch. Most companies deciding to offshore
are committed to having operations in the new country for at least several years. If wages are rising
rapidly, as they are in some fields in India, the cost savings associated with offshoring may be lower
over time as wages increase. Likewise, political changes could have an impact on the cost of doing
business within certain countries.
Though the decision to offshore is driven by senior management, once the offshored operations are
up and running their involvement usually tapers off, leaving HR to manage the continuing cultural
and personnel challenges as they arise. Once the decision to offshore has been made, HR is
responsible not only for managing the people management practices across all operations but for also
managing the impact the decision to offshore has on the remaining U.S. employees.
It is this latter issue that may be the most crucial for HR to focus on. There is no doubt that the issue
is an increasingly divisive one that could have a significant impact on employee morale. If
employees feel in danger of being laid off as jobs are moved overseas, commitment and engagement
are likely to be damaged. This is particularly important because job security is such a critical factor
in job satisfaction. In SHRM's recent research on job satisfaction, job security consistently tops the
list of the most important factors that determine employee satisfaction. With job security such an
important issue, the threat of offshoring is likely to have a bigger impact on employee satisfaction
and performance than many employers may realize. This could have financial implications resulting
from higher turnover rates and lower productivity levels, especially during the time period that the
offshoring process is taking place. It could also increase unionization–the top factor in the SHRM
Job Security Survey that made employees feel insecure in their jobs was not being unionized. HR
will need to take these kinds of issues into account when helping employers calculate the impact–
financial and otherwise–of offshoring.
Aside from all of the issues related to the people management aspect to the offshoring process, HR
practitioners also wonder how vulnerable they themselves are to the offshoring trend. There is some
dispute about to what extent HR practitioners should be worried. One stance is that HR should feel
just as vulnerable as accountants, architects, software engineers and other white-collar professionals.
But another view maintains that the biggest changes in the HR profession will continue to be brought
about by technology, rather than the threat of cheap overseas labor and argues that this will continue
to have the most influence on both the role of the HR profession and the kinds of jobs that the HR
professionals will be doing in the future.
One certainty is that the offshoring trend is not going to go away as either a factor in the employment
landscape or as a topic of sometimes contentious debate. Even organizations that decide not to
offshore will still feel the impact of the trend in some way because so many industries and
businesses–customers, business partners and consultants–are likely to be involved in offshoring in
some way. Because of this, even those companies without offshored operations may have to deal
with a workforce that is increasingly concerned about job security and the resulting impact this has
on employee motivation, performance, recruitment and retention. For HR practitioners this may be
offshoring's biggest challenge
human Resources Generalists, Managers, and Directors, depending on the size of the organization,
may have overlapping responsibilities. In larger organizations, the Human Resources Generalist, the
Manager, and the Director have clearly defined, separated roles in HR management with
progressively more authority and responsibility in the hands of the Manager, the Director, and
ultimately, the Vice President who may lead several departments including administration.
HR directors, and occasionally HR managers, may head up several different departments that are
each led by functional or specialized HR staff such as the training manager, the compensation
manager, or the recruiting manager.

Human Resources staff members are advocates for both the company and the people who work in the
company. Consequently, a good HR professional performs a constant balancing act to meet both
needs successfully.

The Changing Human Resources Role

The role of the HR professional is changing.. Their role was more closely aligned with personnel and
administration functions that were viewed by the organization as paperwork.

When you consider that the initial HR function, in many companies, comes out of the administration
or finance department because hiring employees, paying employees, and dealing with benefits were
the organization's first HR needs, this is not surprising.
In this role, the HR professional served executive agendas well, but was frequently viewed as a road
block by much of the rest of the organization. While some need for this role occasionally remains —
you wouldn’t want every manager putting his own spin on a sexual harassment policy, as an example
— much of the HR role is transforming itself.

New HR Role

The role of the HR manager must parallel the needs of his or her changing organization. Successful
organizations are becoming more adaptable, resilient, quick to change direction, and customer-
centered.

Within this environment, the HR professional, who is considered necessary by line managers, is a
strategic partner, an employee sponsor or advocate and a change mentor. At the same time,
especially the HR Generalist, still has responsibility for employee benefits administration, often
payroll, and employee paperwork, especially in the absence of an HR Assistant.

Depending on the size of the organization, the HR manager has responsibility for all of the functions
that deal with the needs and activities of the organization's people including these areas of
responsibility.

 Recruiting.
 Hiring.
 Training.
 Organization Development.
 Communication.
 Performance Management.
 Coaching.
 Policy Recommendation.
 Salary and Benefits.
 Team Building.
 Employee Relations.
 Leadership.
With all of this in mind, in Human Resource Champions, Dave Ulrich, one of the best thinkers and
writers in the HR field today, and a professor at the University of Michigan, recommends three
additional roles for the HR manager.

HR Role: Business and Strategic Partner

In today’s organizations, to guarantee their viability and ability to contribute, HR managers need to
think of themselves as strategic partners. In this role, the HR person contributes to the development
of and the accomplishment of the organization-wide business plan and objectives.

The HR business objectives are established to support the attainment of the overall strategic business
plan and objectives. The tactical HR representative is deeply knowledgeable about the design of
work systems in which people succeed and contribute. This strategic partnership impacts HR
services such as the design of work positions; hiring; reward, recognition and strategic pay;
performance development and appraisal systems; career and succession planning; and employee
development.

To be successful business partners, the HR staff members have to think like business people, know
finance and accounting, and be accountable and responsible for cost reductions and the measurement
of all HR programs and processes. It's not enough to ask for a seat at the executive table; HR people
will have to prove they have the business savvy necessary to sit there.

HR Role: Employee Advocate

As an employee sponsor or advocate, the HR manager plays an integral role in organizational

success via his knowledge about and advocacy of people. This advocacy includes expertise in how to
create a work environment in which people will choose to be motivated, contributing, and happy.

Fostering effective methods of goal setting, communication and empowerment through

responsibility, builds employee ownership of the organization. The HR professional helps establish
the organizational culture and climate in which people have the competency, concern and
commitment to serve customers well.

In this role, the HR manager provides employee development opportunities, employee assistance
programs, gain sharing and profit-sharing strategies, organization development interventions, due
process approaches to problem solving and regularly scheduled communication opportunities.

HR Role: Change Champion

The constant evaluation of the effectiveness of the organization results in the need for the HR
professional to frequently champion change. Both knowledge about and the ability to execute
successful change strategies make the HR professional exceptionally valued.

Knowing how to link change to the strategic needs of the organization will minimize employee
dissatisfaction and resistance to change.

The HR professional contributes to the organization by constantly assessing the effectiveness of the
HR function. He also sponsors change in other departments and in work practices. To promote the
overall success of his organization, he champions the identification of the organizational mission,
vision, values, goals and action plans. Finally, he helps determine the measures that will tell his
organization how well it is succeeding in all of this.

Roles of manager
LEADER IS A REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBORDINATES

He is intermediary between the work groups and top management. They are called linking pins by
rensis likert. As linking pins they serve to integrate the entire organization and the effectiveness
depends on the strength of these linking pins. Leader shows personal consideration for the
employees. As representatives they carry the voice of the subordinates to the to management.

LEADER IS AN APPROPRIATE COUNSELLOR

Quite often people in the work place need counseling to eliminate the emotional disequilibrium that
is created sometimes in them. Leader removes barriers and stumbling block to effective performance.
For instance, frustration that results from blocked need drive keeps an employee derailed or the
working track. It is here the leader comes in, renders wise counsel, releases the employee of the
emotional tension and restores equilibrium.

USES POWER PROPERLY

If a leader is to effectively achieve the goal expected of him, he must have power and authority to act
in a way that will stimulate a positive response from the workers. A leader , depending on the
situation , exercises different types of power , viz reward power and expert power. Besides the
formal basis , the informal basis of power also have a more powerful impact on organizational
effectiveness. No leader is effective unless the subordinates obey his orders. There fore, the leader
uses appropriate power so that subordinates willingly obey the orders and come forward with
commitment.

LEADER MANAGES THE TIME WELL

Times is precious and vital but often overlooked in management. There are three dimensions of time
– boss – imposed – time , system- imposed –time and self – imposed time . That are prominent in
literature. Because the leader has through knowledge of the principle of time management such as
preparing time charts, scheduling techniques, etc., he is in a position to utilize the time productively
in the organization.

STRIVES FOR EFFECTIVENESS

Quite frequently the manager are work – abolic and too busy with petty things to address to major
details of effectiveness. To fill the gap, sometimes leaders throws his concerted efforts to bring
effectiveness by encouraging and nurturing team work, by better time management and by the proper
use of power. Further, leader provides and adequate reward structure to encourage performance of
employees. Leader delegates authority where needed and invites participation where possible to
achieve the better result. He also provides the workers with necessary resources. By communicating
to workers what is expected of them, leader brings effectiveness to organization. The above functions
of the leader are by no means comprehensive but they do suggest as to what leaders do generally.

MANAGING AND LEADING

Leading and managing are not synonymous. One popular way of distinguishing between managing
and leading is brought out by the French terms dux and Rex. Dex is a leader and an activist,
innovators and often an inspirational type and rex is a stabilizer or broker of manager. But more
realistically, effective management required good leadership. Bennis had once commented, there are
many institutions I know are very well managed but very poorly led”. This statement crystal –
clearly demonstrates that the difference between managing, and leading is indeed a lot. Though a
layman considers managing as a broad terms including leading function a behaviorist advances the
following points to marshall the difference between these two leading and managing.

RELEATIONSHIPS

Managerial behavior implies the existence of a manager managed relationship. This relationship
arises with in organizational context. Where as leadership can occur why where, it does not have to
originate in the organization context. for example , a mob can have a leader but cannot have a
manager. Further, is an organization, informal. Group have leader not managers.

SOURCES OF INFLUENCE

Another potential difference between leader and manager lies in their sources of influence. Authority
is attached to the managerial position in the case of a manager: where as a leader may not have
authority but can receive power directly from his followers. In other words, managers obtain
authority from his followers. In rather pure terms, this is the difference between the formal authority
theory and the acceptance theory of authority.

SANCTIONS

A Manger has command over all allocation and distributions of sanctions. For Example, manager has
control over the positive sanctions such as promotion and awards for his task performance and the
contribution to organizational objectives. Manager is also in a position to exercises the negative
sanctions such as with holding promotions, or mistakes, etc. In a sharp contrast, a leader has
altogether different type of sanctions to exercises and grant. He cans gerent or with hold access to
satisfying the very purpose of joining the group’s social satisfactions and related task rewards. These
informal sanctions are relevant to the individual with belongingness or ego needs: where as the
organizational sanctions granted or exercised by the managers are geared to the physiological and
security needs of individual.

ROLE CONTINUANCE

Another fundamental difference between managing and leading is the role continuance. A manager
may continue in office as long as his performance is satisfactory and acceptable to the organization.
In sharp contrast, a leader maintains his position only through the day to day wish to the followers.

REASONS FOR FOLLOWING

Though in both managing and leading followers become involved, the reasons may be different.
People follow managers because their job description, supported by a system of rewards and
sanctions, requires them to follow. Where as people follow leader on voluntary basis. Further, it
there are no followers, leader no more exists. But, even if there are no followers, a manager may be
there.