Background of Morrisons

Morrison’s supermarket is one of the well-known chains of United Kingdom, which is majorly engaged in the operations of the retail supermarket stores. This particular company offers various products such as grocery items, fresh foods items that are uniquely sourced, processed and are sold through their own manufacturing facilities. On the daily basis, around 11 million households enjoy the Morrisons services. The services provided by them are of lower prices as they are committed towards helping to their ultimate customers by saving their money on every day basis (Williams, et al, 2010).

Hence, this report will majorly highlights about how Morrisons will be exploring the possible market opportunities in China. By the use of hofstede’s cross- cultural dimensions analysis, which helps in knowing more about the country and the challenges, faced by morrisons for maintaining it worth and helps in company to sustain for the longer period of time.

In terms of china, it is the world third largest country, which is the most developed after Canada and Russia. Hence, this ensures that it is the most populated country, which needs more of consuming articles and grocery items and eatables. Hence, Morrisons has decided to open one of its outlets in china as a new entrant but before that, the company should analyse that changes such as communication barrier, leadership, ethics, negotiations and marketing aspects, which can be major, affected. Through hofstede cultural dimensions, it will be easier for Morrisons to make a new market entry and will generate by ensuring the best services to the ultimate customers (Dickson, et al, 2012).

(Source: Hofstede, 2010)

This dimension highlights or expresses the attitude of the culture towards the inequalities. Moreover, associates of institutions admit that there must be an unequal distribution of power within the country. In terms of china, their larger power distance, this states that communication in between employees with their superiors is diverged. Hence, they gain respect due to the intrinsic nature of employees. However, in terms of Australia, their low power distance hence top management are totally relied on employees and flow of communication is informal, direct in comparative to china (Hofstede, 2011).

This issue highlights about the degree of independence, as individualist only look after themselves or their family and while collectivist people majorly care for group in exchange of loyalty aspect. In terms of Australia, they are highly individualist in comparison to china. Hence, Australian is more concern for themselves and the immediate family member rather china belongs to collectivist. In which, personal relationship are lesser important over task or company (Hofstede, 2010). 

Hofstede’s Cross-Cultural Dimensions Analysis

This aspect of hofstede cultural highlights about the society which majorly focuses on success and accomplishments gained by masculines and whereas femininity highlights about quality of life. In terms of china, people out there are more success oriented. They sacrifice their families over their work. Hence, this aspect generates the gender stereotype and biasness in china. Similarly, Australia is also considered as Masculine society in which achievement and success highlights the higher score, which generates dynamism in the society. Hence, Australian also having a mindset of lives to work in order to obtain monetary rewards and consequently attains the higher status and more (De Mooij, 2015).   

Uncertainty avoidance highlights about the community tolerance for uncertain behaviour and vagueness. China in this term is deceived because of weak uncertainty avoidance, which tends to be those where people are relatively free. In terms of cultural acceptance, people of china out there tend to obey laws, rules and regulations and need strong assistance and guidance rather than considering decisions on spot. However, in terms of Australia, people and management both are open to new ideas, acceptance while trying out something new. Other than this, they are managerial risk takers and are less emotional. They work in more of organised and structured form, which highlights their culture (Werner, 2009).

In this aspect of hofstede, china follows the long-term orientation aspect, which highlights about some links with the past while dealing with the current and future challenges. China with 87 % score highlights about the practical culture, in this people of china is more relied over truth, which are part of the situation, context and time. Hence, this highlights the adoption of traditions to the changed conditions. In terms of Australia, they carry nominative culture, they do have respect for tradition but they do not think of propensity to save for future and tries to achieve quick results. 

This aspect majorly highlights the extent to which an individual able to control their desires and impulse. Whoever is weak at controlling are known as indulgent and relatively who are strong at it will be considered as restraint. In terms of Australia, people out there are highly indulgent, which tends to enjoy their life and possess positivity and higher degree of leisure time. However, comparatively, china comes under a category of restrained society. As they do not put their much time in fulfilling their desires and enjoy their leisure’s. Although they control the gratification of their desires and thinks of indulging themselves is wrong to their image (Cui, Ting, 2009).

Power Distance

Universalism v/s particularism:

In terms of universalism, Australian gives more emphasis on values, rules, ethics and obligations and they do not prioritize relationships. While China belongs to particularism for them, relationships matter more. Hence, Morrison an Australian based company will face a major challenge while following various negotiations, forming marketing strategies as they are very direct and work with rules and avoid relations whereas, Chinese people majorly rely on relationship building.

Individual v/s communitarianism:

In this aspect, individual highlights about the personal freedom and achievement, Australian people believe and forms their own decisions. Whereas China culture adopts communitarianism, in which they think and form decisions in groups as they avoid favouritism and provide helps in exchange of loyalty. Hence, Morrisons while moving to china should adopt the collective attitude while performing their management skills (Stephen, Joshua, and Robert, 2014).   

Specific v/s diffuses:

Being specific highlights that personal and work life are to be separated and believe that people can work together without focus over mending relationships. However, in terms of diffuse, work and personal are considered as same entity. In addition, people of China thinks that it is mandatory to build relations, as they are good for both business meetings and rather being socially. Hence, Morrisons while making a new market entry has to face challenge by being more socially active along with the business meetings (Hill, 2008).

Neutral v/s emotional: 

Being neutral highlights that people work without showing or highlighting emotions at workplace rather being emotional. Moreover, being emotional highlights one expressing their how he or she is feeling. Hence, this factor did not affect Australia while shifting as china’s culture being neutral while working in an organisation.

Achievement v/s ascription:

Achievement aspects highlight about performance no matter who is achieving it. Whereas, ascription aspect highlight about the power, title and position which matter and needs to be recognized time to time by being performing at their best.

Sequential time v/s synchronous time:

Sequential time aspect highlights about the punctuality, planning of the individual. In this time is money culture is adopted and people do not appreciate it when it schedule is thrown off. In addition, synchronous time is adopted by Australia where their people sees up past, present and future at once and views plans and commitments as flexible. Hence, Morrisons needs to sequential rather than being synchronous.

Internal v/s outer directions:

In Australia, Morrisons follows internal directions in which they control nature and work accordingly in order to achieve goals. Whereas outer direction highlights that china people or employees are controlled by environment in order to achieve gaols and whatever being told to them is performed by them by avoiding conflicts. Hence, Morrisons while entering china needs to follow top management sayings by avoiding conflicts and achieving goals (Ferraro, and Briody, 2013).

Individualism vs Collectivism

Morrisons making a new market entry in china has to face various challenges such as communication with the various stakeholders, issues in handling negotiations working in different environment and ethics and marketing strategies helps in suggesting that they should follow strong relationships before closing deals. 

Chinese culture mainly relies on Guanxi, which highlights about the close relationships or social or business connections, which are totally based in mutual interest and benefits. This aspect is best when Morrisons by the use of guanxi build relationship with government officials, which will further helps in any issues (Bian, & Zhang, 2014).

Improving communication skills and greeting skills is also one of the most important aspects that Morrisons need to work upon it. Flow of communication should be formal and direct rather than being informal as it affects the overall performance and relationships in between countries.

In negotiation concern, china business negotiations are occurred at slower pace. As decisions are taken in longer time as, they are clearly reviewed. China culture adopts strong uncertainty avoidance, as negotiators of china are shrewd. Hence, without forcing them for the quick decisions accepts their delays and as patience in this concern are appreciated (Jiang, 2013).  

Conclusion

From the above report, we can conclude that, while entering into the different culture, organisation needs to face many challenges. However, if they are altered timely, their deals are made and revenue are generated and objectives are fulfilled. Similarly, when Morrisons an Australian based company is entering into china certain challenges in terms of language, business management and while negotiating issues are faced but they can be altered timely by accepting the different culture, their culture practices and behaviour for overall success. 

References

Bian, Y., & Zhang, L. (2014). Corporate social capital in Chinese guanxi culture. In Contemporary perspectives on organizational social networks (pp. 421-443). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Cui, Y., Ting, Z. (2009) Cross-culture perspective Retrieved from https://hh.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:286121/FULLTEXT01

De Mooij, M. (2015) cross-cultural research in international marketing: clearing up some confusion. International Marketing Review, 32 (6), pp. 646-662

Dickson, M. W., Castaño, N., Magomaeva, A., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2012). Conceptualizing leadership across cultures. Journal of world business, 47(4), 483-492

Ferraro, G.P., and Briody, E.K. (2013) the cultural dimension of global business. Upper Saddle River. Pearson.

Hill, C. (2008) International business: competing in the global market place. Strategic direction.24 (9).

Hofstede, G.  (2010) Cultures and organisations: Software of the mind.  United States.McGraw hill

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), 8

Jiang, Y. (2013). Business negotiation culture in China a game theoretic approach. International Business Research, 6(3), 109

Stephen, S., Joshua, B., and Robert, P. (2014) The role of culture in international relationship marketing. Journal of marketing. 789 (5), pp. 78- 98.

Werner, S. (2009) Recent developments in international management research. Journal of management. 28(3), pp. 277-305.

Williams, J., Memery, J., Megicks, P., & Morrison, M. (2010). Ethics and social responsibility in Australian grocery shopping. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 38(4), 297-316