Soft Aspects with Hard Consequences?
A research on an intercultural cooperation between France
and the Netherlands
Soft Aspects with Hard Consequences?
A research on an intercultural cooperation between France
and the Netherlands
Faculty of Management and Organisation University of Groningen
First Mentor RuG: Drs. RA C.P.A. Heijes Second Mentor RuG: Dr. P.E. Kamminga
First Mentor Thales: H. Damhuis Second Mentor Thales: Ir. J.E. Dekker Third Mentor Thales: P. Olechny 19 August 2004
J.J.J. van Os
Student number: 1064304
Preface
From the beginning of my study period in Groningen, I have been interested in foreign countries, foreign people and their culture. One of the results of this interest is that I have invested a great deal of energy in going abroad since the second year of university. This includes travelling abroad, following a language course in Central America, but also participating in an exchange programme with a South African university. A second result of this interest is the choice for International Business as the specialisation of my study. And when the opportunity turned up to finish my studies by examining the influences of culture on a French – Dutch cooperation, the choice was easily made.
During the visits to other countries, I learned that culture is not necessarily restricted to how people dress, look and what they eat. It is also linked to the behaviour of the people. The research described in this thesis gave me the opportunity to get a more detailed insight in how behaviour, related to culture on a company level, can influence the ever-increasing world of international business.
This report tries to make people aware of the consequences that cultural aspects might have on doing business with foreign countries or on the merging with foreign organisations.
Especially in a world in which people are more linked to each other than ever before (several Eastern European countries have just recently become part of the European Union, which is just one of the many examples), it could be the cultural factors that determine whether your company is up to face the challenges this new world entails.
Firstly and most importantly, I would like to thank all the employees within the Thales Group, who gave me the opportunity to carry out this study. I especially would like to thank my supervisors within Thales, who invested a lot of time in the guidance of this research. But I am also grateful to all the employees within both Thales France and Thales Nederland who took the time to participate in one of the interviews, conducted for this research. Further, I would like to thank my mentors at the University of Groningen. Criticising and discussing the elements under research always generated useful insights.
Now it only remains for me to wish that you take pleasure in reading this report.
Hengelo, 29 July 2004
Joost van Os
Executive summary
Background information
Since November the 9th 1989, the day the Berlin Wall fell, a number of things have changed in the business environment of the defence industry. Governments of numerous countries have reduced their budgets for defence, which results in a number of difficulties for organisations operating in this sector. In order to cope with these changes in the business environment, companies start to merge and organisation sizes increase. Issues, such as cultural differences, cooperation, scale expansion, efficiency, duplication prevention and the merging of product portfolios, start to play an important role for these organisations. This is also the situation for the French company Thomson-CSF.
The company
“Established in France more than a century ago, Thales is a global electronics company serving Aerospace, Defence and Information Technology markets worldwide” (Thales Group). Thales is the result of several international mergers. Holland Signaal, for instance, merged with the French company Thomson CSF in 1990. At the end of 2000, the name Holland Signaal – Thomson CSF changed in Thales. Thales’ strengths are its innovation and technological excellence, dedication to people, dual-use technology (both commercial and military purposes are served) and finally its international development and local partnership (Corporate Presentation). Thales’ customers can be found all over the world. 55 percent of its customers are situated in Europe, in which the United Kingdom and France are the most frequent buyers of Thales’ products. Other areas include North America, Asia-Pacific and the Middle East (Corporate Presentation). With operations in more than 50 countries and with 65,000 employees, the Thales Group generated 10.6 billion euros in revenues in 2003 and can be considered as a serious player on the international market.
Research question and objective
The objective of this research is to get insight in the cultural aspects of the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland. The research is aimed at identifying the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland and determine their influence on the cooperation. Also, the generation of a number of recommendations for the management of a bi-cultural cooperation is part of the objective. Eventually the goal of this research is to improve the intercultural cooperation, which leads to a better performance, which, in its turn, will lead to a bigger competitive advantage.
The research question, based on this objective, is:
‘How is the intercultural cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland influenced by the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland, which are, on their turn, influenced by the national cultures of France and the Netherlands, and how, focussing on the cultural aspects, can the intercultural cooperation be managed successfully?’
Research design
To get an answer to this main research question, the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland need to be studied. Conducting twelve in-depth interviews generates a description of these two cultures. Next to the interviews, participant observation is also used as a data collection method. After having gained insight in both organisational cultures, ways to manage a bi-cultural cooperation need to be studied. First, this is done by conducting a
literature study on this subject. Second, a workshop is organised within the Thales organisation. During this workshop, different theories of management of culture are discussed next to whether these theories are applicable for the Thales situation.
Theory
The theories used for this research are all linked to culture. First of all, a theory to describe a national culture is needed. Second, theoretical background is needed to describe an organisational culture. Thirdly, the different ways to manage culture need to be based on theory. The theory of Hofstede (1997) describes the national cultures of both France and the Netherlands in this report. The description of these cultures is also used to see whether the organisational cultures are influenced by the cultures of both countries. To get more insight in how organisational cultures can be described, the theory of Neuijen (1999) and the theory of Trompenaars (1997) are studied. Finally, the methods to manage culture within the cooperation are based on the theory of Harris & Moran (1991), Hoecklin (1995) and Rijamampianina & Maxwell (2002). These three theories are combined in a model, which gives an overview how culture can be managed.
Results
The following elements are used to give an overview of the two organisational cultures.
- Attitude towards the boss - Attitude of the employees - Openness of the organisation - Attitude towards work - Attitude towards time - Attitude towards colleagues
This framework to map the organisational cultures is chosen, based on the pattern that emerged after having conducted the in-depth interviews, complemented with the participant observation. The following results are found:
• Within Thales France, the boss is seen as the person with the final responsibility and the most knowledge. The boss expects a certain loyalty from his employees and it can be said that there is a distance between the superior and the worker. Within Thales Nederland, the boss is much more a facilitator and the workers perceive themselves as being equal to their superior.
• The employees of Thales France are more directed towards the financial aspects of the business than the Dutch employees, who are more focussed on the technical aspects.
Further, the Dutch employees have a tendency to give a judgmental value to the French ‘way of doing’.
• Both companies can be described as being ‘closed’ towards, for instance, people from outside the organisation.
• The two organisations differ in their attitude towards work. These differences occur both at the start of a project and during the project and are related to, for instance, the amount of information that is needed, the planning and the decision-making process.
• French Thales employees tend to work on different things at the same time, while Dutch employees work on one thing at the same time. Further, Dutch Thales employees plan their work according to the ‘blue sky scenario’ in contrast with the French, who also take into account possible setbacks and plan slack time.
• The attitude towards colleagues in Thales France can be described as being pure business relations. Within Thales Nederland, next to the business relationships, there is also a lot of social contact.
Next to these cultural elements, it becomes clear that power also plays a significant role in the cooperation. Some of the, especially Dutch, employees have the feeling the collaboration is not a truly friendly and cooperative one. The result of this is that the Dutch are reluctant in sharing their knowledge. Also, internal competition does exist within the cooperation.
Concerning the influence of culture, there is a difference between the levels of cooperation that exists. Culture influences the cooperation the most on the level of projects and programmes and the least on the level of technology. Regarding the impact of the cultural aspects on the cooperation, these are both positive as well as negative. The positive aspects mostly deal with the fact that people from both organisations admit that there are things that can be learnt from the other. However, not much of this multicultural learning is actually taking place. The negative influences of culture are mostly based on differences between the organisation cultural elements. Especially the differences between the decision-making processes, the attitudes of the employees and the attitudes towards time can cause problems.
These differences can results in misunderstandings, a lack of feeling united, but also mistrust, deception and a lack of motivation to cooperate.
Conclusions and recommendations
A number of conclusions can be drawn on the basis of the results of this research. First of all, some aspects of the two organisational cultures can be linked with the national cultures.
However, other aspects cannot be found in the cultures on a national level or even contradict these. Further, the framework of the organisation cultural elements is a conclusion in itself.
The company cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland can be mapped by looking at the six dimensions, mentioned above. This research shows that the organisation cultures do have an influence and impact on the cooperation. One of the most essential conclusions of this report is that the cultural elements within the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland are not fully used to create a competitive environment in which the performance is maximised. Instead, the cultural issues are more of a handicap for the cooperation than an advantage.
The recommendations of this report are partly based on theory. To give the recommendations a more practical value, a workshop is organised within Thales to apply the theories in reality.
Also, part of the recommendations is based on the results and discussion of this research, generating advice of a more practical nature. In total, 16 recommendations are generated. The recommendations rest on the principles of creating cultural awareness and sensitivity, focussing on universal issues, sharing success, creating repeated interactions, creating a shared vision and providing possibilities for multicultural learning. Also, the communicational factor is included in the recommendations, next to working according to the organisation instead of the nationality and screening new employees on their international experience.
Table of contents
Preface ... 3
Executive summary ... 4
Table of contents... 7
Table of figures ... 10
Table of tables... 11
Table of appendices ... 12
List of abbreviations... 13
1 Introduction... 14
1.1 Research motivation ... 14
1.2 Exploration of the research topic ... 14
1.3 Relevant theory ... 15
1.4 Reading guide... 15
2 Description of the organisation... 17
2.1 Thales Group ... 17
2.2 Thales Nederland... 18
2.2.1 History of Thales Nederland ... 18
2.2.2 Thales Nederland today ... 18
2.3 Organisational structure Thales Nederland ... 18
2.3.1 Functional organisation structure Thales Nederland... 19
2.3.2 Matrix organisation structure Thales Nederland... 19
2.4 ‘Joint Radar Sensors’ ... 20
2.4.1 ‘Joint Radar Sensors’ and its function... 20
2.4.2 ‘Joint Radar Sensors’ and its structure... 20
2.5 Corporate policy and strategy Thales... 21
2.5.1 Corporate policy and strategic aspects of the Thales Group... 21
2.5.2 Strategic elements of Thales Nederland... 21
3 Problem definition ... 22
3.1 Background information ... 22
3.2 Description of the problem definition ... 22
3.2.1 Research objective... 22
3.2.2 Research question ... 22
3.2.3 Pre-conditions ... 23
3.3 Sub-questions ... 23
3.4 Definitions ... 23
3.4.1 Intercultural cooperation ... 23
3.4.2 National culture... 24
3.4.3 Organisational culture ... 25
4 Research design... 26
4.1 Research characterisation ... 26
4.1.1 Research strategy ... 26
4.1.2 Research classification... 26
4.2 Conceptual model... 26
4.3 Operationalisation of research elements ... 28
4.3.1 National culture... 28
4.3.1.1 Chanchani & Theivanathampillai’s study... 28
4.3.1.2 Choosing a suitable typology for this research... 28
4.3.2 Organisational culture ... 29
4.4 Research Planning ... 30
5 Methodology ... 31
5.1 Data sources ... 31
5.2 Data collection... 31
5.2.1 Methodological issues regarding the data collection ... 31
5.2.1.1 Actual data collection methods ... 31
5.2.1.2 Research population... 32
5.2.1.3 Sampling technique and strategies to gain access ... 33
5.2.1.4 Actual sample and demographic aspects ... 33
5.2.2 The in-depth interviews ... 34
5.2.2.1 Aspects and structure of the interviews... 34
5.2.2.2 Generating the relevant data... 34
5.2.3 The participant observation ... 35
5.3 Data analysis ... 36
5.4 Requirements of this thesis ... 37
5.4.1 Verifiability... 37
5.4.2 Reliability ... 37
5.4.3 Validity ... 38
6 Theoretical framework... 39
6.1 Theoretical introduction to the research issues ... 39
6.1.1 Reasons for the merger and acquisition boom... 39
6.1.2 Reasons why mergers fail... 40
6.2 National cultures ... 40
6.2.1 Dimensions of a national culture ... 40
6.2.2 Describing the national cultures of France and the Netherlands ... 41
6.3 Organisational cultures... 42
6.3.1 Organisational cultures by Neuijen et al ... 42
6.3.2 Organisational cultures by Trompenaars ... 43
6.4 The influences of cultural diversity on an organisation ... 44
6.5 Managing culture... 45
6.5.1 Introduction to managing culture ... 46
6.5.2 Managing culture by Hoecklin ... 46
6.5.3 Managing culture by Rijamampianina & Maxwell... 46
6.5.3.1 Organisational processes influenced by cultural diversity ... 47
6.5.3.2 Successful management of the four organisational processes ... 48
6.5.4 Changing a culture... 49
6.6 Generating the theoretical framework to manage culture ... 49
7 Results ... 50
7.1 Overall feelings about the cooperation... 50
7.2 Additional aspects that influence the cooperation... 51
7.2.1. Business sector ... 51
7.2.2 Workload ... 51
7.2.3 Communication ... 52
7.3 The organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland ... 53
7.3.1 Attitude towards the boss ... 53
7.3.2 Attitude of the employees... 54
7.3.3 Openness of the organisation... 54
7.3.4 Attitude towards work ... 55
7.3.5 Attitude towards time ... 56
7.3.6 Attitude towards colleagues ... 57
7.4 Examples of business aspects... 58
7.4.1 Making a decision ... 58
7.4.2 Meetings ... 58
7.4.3 Conflicts ... 59
7.5 Power... 59
7.6 Influence of culture on the cooperation... 60
7.6.1 Influence of culture on the level of technology ... 60
7.6.2 Influence of culture on the level of management... 61
7.6.3 Influence of culture on the level of programmes and projects ... 61
7.7 Impact of culture on the cooperation... 62
7.7.1 Positive impact of culture... 62
7.7.2 Negative impact of culture ... 62
7.8 The workshop ... 64
8 Discussion ... 65
8.1 Linking the results to theory... 65
8.1.1 Linking both organisational cultures to theory... 65
8.1.1.1 Theory of Neuijen et al ... 65
8.1.1.2 Theory by Trompenaars ... 66
8.1.2 Influence of the national cultures on the organisational cultures ... 66
8.1.2.1 National cultural elements that do influence the organisation cultures ... 67
8.1.2.2 National cultural elements that do no influence the organisation cultures ... 67
8.1.2.3 National cultural elements that are not related to the organisation cultures .. 67
8.2 Limitations of the research ... 68
8.2.1 Organisation cultural elements ... 68
8.2.2 Theory of Hofstede ... 68
8.2.3 Exploratory nature of the research ... 69
8.2.4 Stereotyping... 69
9 Conclusions... 70
9.1 Concluding in light of the research objective and research question ... 70
9.2 National cultures of France and the Netherlands ... 70
9.3 Organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland... 71
9.4 Influence of the national culture on the organisational culture ... 71
9.5 Influence of the organisational cultures on the cooperation ... 72
10 Recommendations... 73
10.1 Communication ... 73
10.2 Cultural awareness and sensitivity ... 73
10.3 Focus on universal issues ... 74
10.4 The sharing principle... 74
10.4.1 Sharing success ... 74
10.4.2 Creating repeated interactions... 75
10.4.3 Creating a shared vision ... 75
10.4.4 Providing multicultural learning possibilities ... 76
10.5 Remaining recommendations ... 76
10.6 Possibilities for future research ... 77
Bibliography ... 78 Appendices ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table of figures
Figure 1 Reading guide ... 16
Figure 2 Business units of Thales Naval Nederland and part of Thales France ... 19
Figure 3 Different layers of culture... 25
Figure 4 Conceptual model ... 27
Figure 5 Organisational culture by Trompenaars... 44
Figure 6 Impact of culture on the organisation ... 45
Figure 7 Organisational processes influenced by cultural diversity ... 47
Table of tables
Table 1 Business areas and business groups ... 17
Table 2 Criteria ratings for each cultural typology ... 29
Table 3 Research planning ... 30
Table 4 Scores on Hofstede's dimensions ... 42
Table of appendices
Appendix 1 Global presence Thales Group ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 2 Functional organisation structure Thales Nederland ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 3 Customers of 'JRS'... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 4 Organisational structure 'JRS'... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 5 Introductory letter ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 6 Invitation letter for the workshop ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 7 Introduction to the interview in English ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 8 Introduction to the interview in Dutch ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 9 Structure of the interview ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 10 Overview of advantages and disadvantages of cultural diversity ...Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 11 An 11-phased approach to change an organisational culture ...Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix 12 Managing cultural diversity... Error! Bookmark not defined.
List of abbreviations
ATM Air Traffic Management
BA Business Area
BG Business Group
BU Business Unit
COL Collectivism
CTBU Common Technical Business Unit
FEM Femininity
IDV Individualism
LTO Long Term Orientation
MAS Masculinity
PD Power Distance
P&E Projects & Engineering
ROF Radar Operations France
RON Radar Operations Nederland
STO Short Term Orientation
TAD Thales Air Defence
TBU Technical Business Unit
TNF Thales Naval France
TNN Thales Naval Nederland
TU Technical Unit
UA Uncertainty Avoidance
1 Introduction
In this chapter, the research conducted for this thesis will be introduced. First, the motivation of the research will be addressed. The reasons why this research is conducted are explained in this section. Second, the research topic, namely the intercultural cooperation, will be addressed. The different elements of the research will be explored here. After this, the different theories used in this report are introduced. Finally, an overview of the different chapters will be given in the reading guide.
1.1 Research motivation
Due to a number of reasons, such as the technological advancement in the last two decades, the business environment of today is an increasingly more global one. According to Rijamampianina & Maxwell (2002: 17), the “economic activity in the global marketplace continues to accelerate, requiring effective responses from management to the inevitable changes”. Cultural diversity is one of these inevitable changes of the globalising business environment. Companies are more and more faced with international mergers and acquisitions and with an increase in doing business with other countries. A lot of these bi-national or multinational work environments are facing difficulties and are not performing as expected.
This is also the situation for Thales.
Thales is an international concern with, worldwide, more than 65000 employees (Corporate Presentation). Thales can be described as a global electronics company serving Aerospace, Defence and Information Technology markets worldwide (Thales Group). Thales is the result of several international mergers. Holland Signaal, for instance, merged with the French company Thomson CSF in 1990 and is still known by a lot of people under its former name.
At the end of 2000, the name Holland Signaal – Thomson CSF changed in Thales and at that moment a start was made with a redesign of the organisation. The ‘technical business unit’
(‘TBU’) ‘Joint Radar Sensors’ (‘JRS’) is one of the outcomes of the merger with Thomson.
‘JRS’ is a bi-national ‘TBU’ with, in the department ‘Projects & Engineering’ (‘P&E’), a 50 / 50 percent distribution of French and Dutch managers. A more thorough description of the company will be given in chapter two.
The cooperation that exists between Thales France and Thales Nederland in ‘JRS’
experiences a number of problems. These problems lead to the formulation of an internship project, with the intention to improve the situation.
1.2 Exploration of the research topic
After a number of conversations with some employees from Thales, it is decided to focus on the cultural aspects that can be found in the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland. This choice is made for two reasons. First of all, literature points at cultural aspects as factors that are responsible for a great number of mergers that go wrong. Second, Thales has recently been involved in a big reorganisation. During this reorganisation, the organisation structure has been adjusted according to the latest requirements. It is, therefore, not an option to look at the structural elements within the organisation.
This thesis, thus, focuses on the cultural aspects of the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland. This does, however, not mean that these aspects are the only aspects that influence the cooperation or that cause all the problems experienced in the intercultural collaboration. There are numerous other issues that affect the relationship between Thales France and Thales Nederland. Financial, strategic and juridical issues are just a few of the
other factors that have an influence on the cooperation. The focus of the report, however, lies on the cultural aspects within the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland.
This means that the other aspects, which might play a role, are less focussed upon. This decision has been made to ensure an in-depth research of a scientific level.
In general, culture is often perceived as a vague phenomenon. Culture is seen as the way people in different countries dress and eat, but also the conduct and behaviour of foreigners is often considered as part of their culture. According to Peters & Waterman (1982: 11), an organisation can be approached by looking at seven aspects. One of the distinctions between these seven aspects is whether they are considered as ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ aspects. Culture is seen as a ‘soft’ issue. This report tries to give insight in this vague, ‘soft’ organisational aspect, culture. It will discuss different ways of defining a culture and the different levels of culture that exist. Next to this, this research tries to identify the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland. It will not only focus on the differences, but also on the overlaps between both cultures. Also the national cultures of France and the Netherlands will be addressed. Finally, different ways how to cope with a situation in which two cultures cooperate will be generated from literature and applied for the Thales situation.
1.3 Relevant theory
The theories that will be used in this research deal with culture. Both theories to discuss national cultures as well as theories to address organisational cultures are part of this study.
Also theories about how to manage bi-cultural or multicultural organisations are included in this study. The following theories are used in this study.
In 1980, Hofstede introduced four dimensions of culture in his book ‘Culture’s Consequences’. A total of 116,000 questionnaires within 40 countries were sent to employees of the company IBM, which resulted in these dimensions. The theory gives insight in, for instance, the attitude towards hierarchy and whether a national culture can be described as individualistic or collectivistic.
The theory of Neuijen et al (1999) and the theory of Trompenaars (1997) are used to describe an organisational culture. Neuijen et al used six dimensions in his study to describe an organisational culture. Trompenaars distinguished two dimensions, which he placed in a figure, creating four quadrants. Both theories will be used to generate insight in possible ways to describe an organisational culture.
Next to theories of describing a culture, theories of how to manage cultural aspects are also included in this study. Several theories are combined to build a model, which gives a number of possible actions that can be taken to ensure that culture and cultural differences work as advantages for the company instead of handicaps. The theories on which this model is based are from Harris & Moran (1991), Hoecklin (1995) and Rijamampianina & Maxwell (2002).
1.4 Reading guide
In this first chapter, an introduction to this research is given. The following chapter deals with the company Thales. This chapter gives an overview of the company and where the research takes place. The third chapter addresses the problem definition. In this part, topics such as the research objective, research question and the pre-conditions will be discussed. The fourth chapter elaborates on the design of this research. The characterisation of the research, the conceptual model and the research planning are part of this chapter. Subsequently, chapter 5 gives background on the methodological issues, such as the data collection, data analysis and
the reporting. In chapter 6, the theoretical framework is generated, which addresses the for this research relevant theories. Chapter 7 lists the results of the data collection. A discussion about the research results and the limitations of this research will be part of chapter 8. The conclusions of this research will be drawn in chapter 9. The last chapter lists a number of recommendations. The next figure generates the reading guide.
Figure 1 Reading guide
Chapter 7: Results Chapter 6: Theoretical framework
Chapter 5: Methodology Chapter 4: Research design Chapter 3: Problem definition Chapter 2: Description of the organisation
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 8: Discussion
Chapter 9: Conclusions
Chapter 10: Recommendations
2 Description of the organisation
In this chapter, an overview of the Thales organisation shall be given. First, the Thales Group in general will be addressed. Important aspects, such as business areas, products, customers, organisation size, revenue and employees will be mentioned. Second, Thales Nederland and its history will be dealt with. Third, the organisational structure will be explained, in order to give insight in the organisation and create a picture where research will take place. This organisational structure consists of both the functional structure and the matrix structure, which facilitates the different projects. Then, the ‘TBU’ ‘JRS’ and its function within Thales Nederland will be described. Finally, an overview of the corporate policy and strategic elements of the Thales Group and Thales Nederland will be given. The core values, mission and sustainable development of the Thales Group will be discussed. The specific mission of Thales Nederland and the strategic objectives of Thales Nederland are also part of this section.
2.1 Thales Group
“Established in France more than a century ago, Thales is a global electronics company serving Aerospace, Defence and Information Technology markets worldwide” (Thales Group). Thales’ operations can be found in three different business areas (‘BA’), each consisting of a number of business groups (‘BG’). Most of Thales’ activities, namely 61 percent, can be found in the Defence area (Corporate Presentation). Thales is a “systems architect with all the critical capabilities needed for the network-enabled warfare of the 21st century”. In the Aerospace area, Thales is active in the aviation safety applications sector, which includes avionics, air traffic management, simulation and training. This ‘BA’ covers 16 percent of the operations of Thales. Finally, 23 percent of Thales’ operations are directed at the IT & Services area. IT solutions for government, businesses and consumers are part of this field of work. Activities found in this ‘BA’ include secure operations, positioning-based solutions, communications components, information systems and services. An overview of the different business areas with their business groups is given in the table below.
Table 1 Business areas and business groups (Thales Group)
Thales’ strengths are its innovation and technological excellence, dedication to people, dual- use technology (both commercial and military purposes are served) and finally, its international development and local partnership (Corporate Presentation). Thales’ customers can be found all over the world. 55 percent of its customers are situated in Europe, in which the United Kingdom and France are the most frequent buyers of Thales’ products. Other areas
BUSINESS AREAS
AEROSPACE (16%) DEFENCE (61%) IT&S (23%)
Air Traffic Management Air Defence OEM Solutions Avionics Systems Airborne Systems Information Systems Training & Simulation Communications Systems Positioning Based Solutions
Naval Secure Operations
BUSINESS GROUPS
Optronics
include North America, Asia-Pacific and the Middle East. The global presence of the Thales Group can be found in Appendix 1. With operations in more than 50 countries and with 65,000 employees, the Thales Group generated 10.6 billion euros in revenues in 2003 and can be considered as a serious player on the international market.
2.2 Thales Nederland
In this paragraph, the history of Thales Nederland will be addressed. Further, the organisation Thales Nederland and its function within the Thales Group will be described.
2.2.1 History of Thales Nederland
In 1922, everything starts for Thales Nederland B.V. The ‘N.V. Hazemeyer’s Fabriek van Signaalapparaten’ starts to produce fire control equipment for two new ships of the Royal Dutch Navy. The company grows rapidly and soon welcomes customers from Sweden, Spain and Greece. During the Second World War, a lot of employees are able to flee to the United Kingdom and continue working on radar and fire control systems. After the Second World War, the Dutch government becomes aware of the importance of a good defence industry and buys the factory. The company continues under the name ‘N.V. Hollandsche Signaalapparaten’ and in these years a lot of techniques and systems are developed, such as radars, computers, air traffic control equipment and fire control for the army. “In 1956, Philips buys a large part of the shares from the government and becomes the main shareholder. The company flourishes and opens plants in several cities across the country.
Near the end of the eighties ‘Signaal’ employs over 5.000 people and serves customers in over 35 countries. As the Cold War ends, the political theatre changes dramatically. Large cuts in defence budgets forces ‘Signaal’ to reorganise, leading to a staff reduction. Meanwhile Philips decides that ‘Defence and Control Systems’ are not part of its core-business and in 1990 ‘Signaal’ is taken over by Thomson-CSF. The reorganisation and the merger with Thomson-CSF brings the company a new driving force. In December 2000, Thomson-CSF changes its name to Thales. Being a member of this group, ‘Thomson-CSF Signaal’ changes its name to Thales Nederland” (Thales Nederland).
2.2.2 Thales Nederland today
Thales Nederland is considered the main centre of excellence for Thales naval activities (Corporate Presentation). Thales Naval Nederland B.V. is the head office of Thales in the Netherlands and is situated in Hengelo. This branch is still known by a lot of people as
‘Hollandse Signaalapparaten’, its former name. All three other offices have their own specialty and are situated in Huizen (Communications), Den Haag (Optronics) and Eindhoven (Munitronics and Cryogenics). In total, Thales has 2600 employees in these four locations.
“Thales Nederland creates high-tech defence solutions for naval and ground-based environments” (Thales Nederland). Thales Nederland combines its “extensive and long experience with an ongoing search for new techniques and possibilities”. This has resulted in a “vast expertise in the fields of radar, infrared, weapon control, display technology and communications equipment”. In 2002, Thales Nederland generated sales revenue of 450 million euros, of which 250 million euros came from export. This makes Thales Nederland B.V. the biggest defence organisation of the Netherlands (Corporate Presentation).
2.3 Organisational structure Thales Nederland
This paragraph will deal with the organisational structure of Thales Nederland. First, the functional organisation structure will be explained. Then the matrix organisation of Thales Nederland is discussed.
2.3.1 Functional organisation structure Thales Nederland
The management of Thales Nederland consists of a chairman with several functional departments, including Human Resources, Sales & Marketing, Finance & Control, Legal Affairs and Multi Domain Multi Domestic (Corporate Presentation). Further, Thales Nederland is active in four out of five ‘BG’s of the Defence area, namely Naval, Communications Systems, Optronics and Air Defence. The three branches of Thales in Germany also fall under the responsibility of Thales Nederland. This is, because these three offices were part of the former ‘Hollandse Signaalapparaten’. The three German establishments take care of the integration and support of Thales’ systems for the German navy. The functional organisation structure of Thales Nederland can be found in Appendix 2.
This research focuses on the ‘TBU’ ‘JRS’. Both the ‘BG’ Naval and the ‘BG’ Air Defence direct this ‘TBU’. ‘JRS’ is operated by the Dutch part of the ‘BG’ Naval and the French part of the ‘BG’ Air Defence (Corporate Presentation). More information on the ‘TBU’ ‘JRS’ can be found in paragraph 2.4. An overview of the different ‘business units’ (‘BU’s) is given in the figure below.
Figure 2 Business units of Thales Naval Nederland and part of Thales France (Corporate Presentation)
2.3.2 Matrix organisation structure Thales Nederland
The development and actual production of the different systems takes place in either a project or a programme. Within the Thales’ terminology, something is called a project when the purchaser hasn’t signed the contract yet and a programme when the contract is signed.
Further, the development of a complete new system is referred to as a ‘Chain 1’ process and the development of an (modified) existing system is called a ‘Chain 2’ process. A Project Manager and a System Engineering Manager head these different projects or programmes.
The Project Manager searches in the different ‘BU’s for the right employees to staff a project or programme. It can be said that the different projects and programmes more or less ‘flow’
through the functional structure, resulting in a matrix structure. “The matrix organisational structure is an attempt to combine the advantages of the pure functional organisation and the pure project organisation” (Blanchard, 1998: 315). It seeks to acquire the greatest amount of technology, within project schedules, time, cost constraints and related customer requirements.
Business Group Naval
Business Group Air Defence Branches:
Hengelo
Business Unit:
Combat Systems
Branches:
Hengelo Delft Business Unit:
Radar &
Sensors
Branches:
Hengelo
Business Unit:
Industrial
& Logistic Services
Branches:
Hengelo Bagnieux (Fr) Delft Rouen (Fr)
Limours (Fr)
Conflans (Fr)
Technical Business Unit:
Joint Radar Sensors Branches:
Hengelo
Business Unit:
Operations
&
Purchasing
2.4 ‘Joint Radar Sensors’
In this paragraph, the ‘TBU’ ‘JRS’ will be addressed. First, the ‘TBU’ in general and its function is mentioned. Then the structural aspects of ‘JRS’ are discussed.
2.4.1 ‘Joint Radar Sensors’ and its function
One of the potential outcomes of the merger in 1990 is an increased efficiency of, then called, Thomson-CSF Signaal. At that time, a specific organisational structure is chosen, but the expected results are not realised. In 2001, a drastic reorganisation tries to improve the situation. A reinforcement of the cooperation between Thales Nederland and Thales France is needed. This is one of the reasons why Thales chooses for a bi-national ‘TBU’ (Joint Radar Sensors Presentation). The second reason is a possible improvement of Thales’ performances in an international environment. The expected outcome of both reasons is an increased international competitiveness. Since 2001, some improvements have been made, but the continuing competition in the world still forces Thales to improve their efficiency levels.
The main function of the bi-national ‘TBU’ is the technological research and development of radars and sensors for ground-based and naval environments. This is the reason why this ‘BU’
is a ‘TBU’. In France, the actual production process takes place within ‘JRS’. In the Netherlands, the production takes place within another ‘BU’, namely ‘Operations &
Purchasing’. When the production of the radar is completed, it returns to ‘JRS’ for a period of testing.
‘JRS’ can be seen as a company within Thales. Different ‘BG’s of Thales call upon ‘JRS’ for the development of radar and sensor systems. These ‘BG’s, such as Naval (both Thales Naval France and Thales Naval Nederland (‘TNF’ and ‘TNN’)), Air Defence (‘Thales Air Defence’
(‘TAD’)) and ‘Air Traffic Management’ (‘ATM’) can be seen as the customers of ‘JRS’. An overview of the customers of ‘JRS’ is given in Appendix 3. Further, ‘JRS’ is considered a cost-centre. This means that ‘JRS’ does not make a profit in the process of developing radar and sensor systems. ‘JRS’ develops a specific system that is needed by one of its ‘customers’
and does this within a specific budget.
2.4.2 ‘Joint Radar Sensors’ and its structure
The ‘JRS’ consists of three departments, each supported with a number of sub-departments or technical units (‘TU’). Both Dutch (from ‘TNN’) and French (from ‘TAD’) employees can be found in all three departments. The organisational structure of ‘JRS’ can be found in Appendix 4. There are 200 employees at work in the department ‘Projects & Engineering’
(‘P&E’), 500 in ‘Radar Operations Nederland’ (‘RON’) and 1100 (including 600 employees that actually produce the different systems) in ‘Radar Operations France’ (‘ROF’).
Within ‘JRS’, the department ‘P&E’ is directed by a Dutch and a French manager. Therefore, the actual distribution of managers of both nationalities within ‘P&E’ is 50 / 50. The reason behind the 50 / 50 distribution of nationalities of the managers is the creation of a feasible bi- national work environment. It is expected that ‘P&E’ will act as a role model for the other departments of ‘JRS’, who will eventually try to create such a bi-national work environment as well. Within ‘P&E’, either a Dutch or a French manager heads the different sub- departments. This manager supervises a number of Dutch employees and a number of French employees. Further, a sub-department headed by a French manager, has a Dutch deputy manager and vice versa. Not taking in account a number of exceptions, most French employees of ‘JRS’ work in France and most Dutch employees work in the Netherlands.
2.5 Corporate policy and strategy Thales
In this last paragraph, the corporate policy and the strategy of Thales will be mentioned. The corporate policy and strategic aspects of the Thales Group as a whole will be discussed first.
Second, the strategic elements of Thales Nederland will be addressed.
2.5.1 Corporate policy and strategic aspects of the Thales Group
Next to technology, there are a number of core values that make Thales into a cohesive group of interactive businesses (Thales Group). These core values are “focussing on customers, developing people, being entrepreneurs and innovators, performing through teamwork and sharing knowledge”. The core values express the reality of markets, in which Thales operates.
They also express the “reality of a worldwide organisation with across-the-board technology expertise and a strategic focus on prime contracting and service provision”. Thales’ mission is to “provide customers with tailored solutions to their security needs, be a leading, high-tech group specialising in electronics and systems integration and be a worldwide group, with a well established European base” (Corporate Presentation).
Sustainable development is an important topic within the Thales Group, especially because much of the activities of Thales are related with the defence industry. The sustainable development policy of Thales has been constructed around the different stakeholders with whom the Thales Group interacts. These are employees, partners, corporate governance players and the surrounding environment (Thales Group). The relationship with each of the stakeholders is subject to specific policies and concrete actions, as the Thales Group aims to fulfil its duty as an exemplary corporate citizen. Thales is fully conscious, not only of the requirements of various international organisations responsible for setting standards of acceptable conduct, but also of the concerns of its own employees, suppliers and customers, shareholders and, more generally, the community at large. This makes ethical conduct a key issue in the sustainable development policy of Thales.
2.5.2 Strategic elements of Thales Nederland
The importance of the sustainable development and ethical aspects in the Thales Group can be found back in the mission of Thales Nederland. The mission of Thales Nederland is:
With commitment and openness, we aim to contribute to
the defence of the sovereignty of states and the security of people
by applying and sharing our unique knowledge and know-how
in the field of naval and ground-based systems
The different branches found in the countries in which Thales operates each have their own strategic objectives. For Thales Nederland these are “adequate profitability, delivering customer-oriented solutions, being the employer of choice, developing both existing and new markets and adequate and efficient knowledge- and technology management” (Corporate Presentation). Each of the different ‘BU’s in the Netherlands contributes to these objectives.
The contribution of ‘JRS’ consists of the competitively priced, in-time delivery of radar sensors for a civil or defence environment, according to the agreed performances and quality (Joint Radar Sensors Presentation). The mission of ‘JRS’ is line with this contribution, namely: “To profitably develop and supply discriminating, customer-requirement dedicated, radar and electro-optic sensors and related knowledge and technology” (Joint Radar Sensors).
3 Problem definition
In this chapter, the following issues will be addressed. First, more specific background information will be given, in order to create insight in which environment this research takes place. Next, a description of the problem definition will be made. The research objective, research question and pre-conditions will be addressed in this part of the chapter. The third topic includes splitting up the main research question in smaller sub-questions. Finally, the different terms used in the description of the problem definition are defined.
3.1 Background information
Since November the 9th 1989, the day the Berlin Wall fell, a number of things have changed in the business environment of the defence industry. Governments of numerous countries have reduced their budgets for defence, which results in a number of difficulties for organisations operating in this sector. In order to cope with these changes in the business environment, companies start to merge and organisation sizes increase. Issues, such as cultural differences, cooperation, scale expansion, efficiency, duplication prevention and the merging of product portfolios, start to play an important role for these organisations. This is also the situation for the French company Thomson-CSF.
In 1990, Thomson-CSF merges with Holland Signaal in order to become an important player in the international defence industry. At that moment, a specific system is chosen to manage this new French / Dutch part of the organisation. However, since the start of the merger in 1990, the expected results have not been realised. Experiments are carried out with different organisational structures in order to improve the organisation. Three years ago, the French / Dutch part of the Thales Group again changes their organisational structure. Up to that day, a global top management controls the organisation and the lower levels (including middle management) are situated locally. Today, the distribution of managers of both nationalities, especially in the department ‘P&E’, is equal. This means that in all management levels, both French and Dutch people can be found. In the last three years, Thales shows some improvements. However, the continuing competition still forces Thales to improve.
3.2 Description of the problem definition
According to De Leeuw (2003: 85), a problem definition consists of a research objective, a research question and the pre-conditions.
3.2.1 Research objective
The objective of this research is to get insight in the cultural aspects of the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland. The research is aimed at identifying the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland and determine their influence on the cooperation. Also, the generation of a number of recommendations for the management of a bi-cultural cooperation is part of the objective. Eventually the goal of this research is to improve the intercultural cooperation, which leads to a better performance, which, in its turn, will lead to a bigger competitive advantage.
3.2.2 Research question
The research question of this study reads: ‘How is the intercultural cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland influenced by the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland, which are, on their turn, influenced by the national cultures of France and the Netherlands and how, focussing on the cultural aspects, can the intercultural cooperation be managed successfully?’
3.2.3 Pre-conditions
According to De Leeuw (2003: 213), the pre-conditions can be applied to two different aspects of the research, namely the research result (or product) or its process.
Product pre-conditions:
- Research will focus on the ‘TBU’ ‘JRS’
- Research will focus on the for the cooperation relevant cultural aspects - The current organisational structure will remain in tact
- Changes in the organisation during this research will not be taken into account
As is mentioned in paragraph 2.4.2, the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland exists in the ‘TBU’ ‘JRS’. The main focus of this research, therefore, lays within the ‘TBU’ ‘JRS’. Further, as mentioned in paragraph 1.2, the focus of this research lies on the relevant cultural aspect found in the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland. Thirdly, after a number of reorganisations, Thales decided that the current organisation structure is the most suitable one. Therefore, the current organisational structure needs to remain in tact. Finally, changes in the organisation, such as in the organisational structure, cannot be taken into account in this research.
Process pre-conditions:
- The research period is six months
According to the university standards, the initial period of research is set at six months.
3.3 Sub-questions
In this paragraph, the main research question is divided in a number of sub-questions. The following sub-questions can be distinguished.
- How can the national cultures of France and the Netherlands be described?
- How can the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland be described?
- How are the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland influenced by the national cultures of both countries?
- How is the intercultural cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland influenced by the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland?
- How can, focussing on the cultural aspects, the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland be managed successfully?
3.4 Definitions
In this paragraph, the different terms that are used in the problem definition will be defined.
3.4.1 Intercultural cooperation
The intercultural cooperation refers to the cooperation that exists between Thales France and Thales Nederland. As mentioned in paragraph 3.2.3, this research focuses on the ‘TBU’
‘JRS’. The research on the intercultural cooperation shall, therefore, concentrate on this ‘BU’
as well.
Three different forms of cooperation can be identified within ‘JRS’. These three forms are cooperation on the level of management, on projects or programmes and on technology. Most cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland takes place within the level of management. As mentioned in paragraph 2.4.2, most of the French managers are directing Dutch employees and vice versa. Next to this fact, managers of both nationalities also cooperate on managerial issues. The second highest level of cooperation takes place within the level of projects and programmes. As mentioned in paragraph 2.3.2, a matrix structure can be identified within Thales. Different employees from both Thales France and Thales Nederland are deployed in the same project or programme. These people have regular meetings and contacts and work together on a radar or sensor system. Finally, cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland is found on the level of technology. This collaboration deals with the functional grouping of specialities as mentioned in paragraph 2.3.1. French employees and Dutch employees are, for instance, assigned to the same sub- department, such as Sensor Engineering. It is tried to enhance the level of knowledge in this sub-department by cooperating. This is done by organising technology days, in which the different employees talk about their knowledge area.
3.4.2 National culture
There are several scientific disciplines that are concerned with the concept of national cultures. These include for example anthropology, sociology and, since the “arrival of global markets and changes in international communication capabilities” (Rijamampianina &
Maxwell, 2002: 1), business management. One of the results is that there are also a great number of definitions of the concept culture.
Culture can be defined as a static or dynamic concept (Heijes in Hoogenboom et al, 2001:
168). A static definition suggests that culture is embedded in the values and meanings of people. A dynamic definition of culture implies that culture is related to the behaviour of people (Neuijen, 1999: 4). Hofstede (1997: 182) also acknowledges this difference and he summarises this insight in the figure on the following page. In this figure, a culture based on values relates to the static definition of culture. A culture based on practices is linked with the dynamic definition. Hofstede states that the differences in the balance between values and practices can be explained by the periods in which the person is socialised in the different cultural levels. A national culture is learned from the earliest childhood and in this time span, a child learns its most fundamental values. Organisational cultures, on the other hand, are learned through socialisation at work. Because this culture is learned in a later stage of life, it is more embedded in practices than values.
Neuijen (1999: 4) states that a national culture is the common understanding that separates people of a specific country from people with a different nationality. Further, a culture is relative. “People in different cultures perceive the world differently and have different ways of doing things, and there is no set standard for considering one group as intrinsically superior or inferior to any other” (Hoecklin, 1995: 24). A culture is also learned, not genetically inherited. And a culture is about groups, “culture is a collective phenomenon”.
Figure 3 Different layers of culture (Hofstede, 1997:182)
This research follows the definition of Neuijen, mentioned above. Further, a national culture in this research is defined as a more static concept than an organisational culture and is thus more related to the values of people than to their practices. However, as can be seen in figure 3, part of a national culture is still based on practices and, therefore, also has dynamic aspects.
3.4.3 Organisational culture
An organisational culture can also be defined as a static or dynamic concept. The important difference between these two definitions, as mentioned above, is that a static definition of an organisational culture suggests that culture is embedded in the values and meanings of the members of an organisation instead of related to the behaviour of these people (Neuijen, 1999: 4). In the first case, an organisational culture deals with the deeply rooted, fundamental value patterns, which the members of an organisation are hardly aware of. In the second situation, an organisational culture is related to the conduct and behaviour found in the organisation. The difference between these two concepts has important consequences, especially in the situation where culture is researched or influenced. Koot & Hogema (1990:
27), state that an organisational culture not only deals with the norms and values of members.
The fact that members of organisations want to distinguish themselves from other companies is more important. It is the desire to identify oneself with their own organisation and the wish to create a strong mutual cohesion and closeness that counts. And communal norms and values, which serve to accentuate this distinction, do not need to be as present as it is often understood.
This research will define an organisational culture in line with Koot & Hogema, namely as the common understanding, which expresses itself in the conduct and behaviour of members of an organisation (Neuijen, 1999: 6). It is this conduct and behaviour that is focussed upon, not the norms and values that may lie underneath. Organisational culture, in this research, is thus defined as a dynamic concept. Finally, a “culture is not a ‘thing’, which can be experienced directly through the senses. Culture does not exist in a simple and easily defined form for a specifiable number of people in a bounded area.” (Hoecklin, 1995: 24).
4 Research design
In this chapter the design of this research will be addressed. First, the research characterisation, with special attention to the research strategy and the classification of the research, will be discussed. Next, a conceptual model is made, in which the different elements of this research are summarised. The explanation of the conceptual model also takes place within this section. Thirdly, the terms used in the problem definition will be operationalised.
Finally, the time schedule and planning of this research will be given. Issues concerning the data collection, data analysis and the reporting are discussed in the next chapter.
4.1 Research characterisation
In this paragraph, the research strategy will be addressed as well as the classification of the research.
4.1.1 Research strategy
A research strategy is a “general plan of how you will go about answering the research question you have set” (Saunders et al, 1997: 74). According to Robson (in Saunders et al, 1997: 75), there are three traditional research strategies, namely an experiment, a survey and a case study. The strategy used in this research is the case study. Robson defines a case study as the “development of detailed, intensive knowledge about a single ‘case’, or a small number of related ‘cases’. This research focuses on a single case. According to Morris and Wood (in Saunders et al, 1997: 76), the case study strategy will be of particular interest if you “wish to gain a rich understanding of the context of the research and the processes being enacted”.
4.1.2 Research classification
A research can be classified in a number of ways. According to Saunders et al (1997: 78),
“the classification most often used is the threefold one of exploratory, descriptive and explanatory”. These three different types of research do not exclude each other, but exist next to each other on a continuum. Therefore, it is possible that a research is both descriptive as well as explanatory. As mentioned in paragraph 3.2.1, the aim of this research is to describe the organisational cultures of Thales Nederland and Thales France. Further, this research tries to give insight in the influence of these organisational cultures on the cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland. This research can, therefore, be classified as both exploratory and descriptive.
Next to differences between researches based on their product, research can also be characterised by differences in methodology (De Leeuw, 2003: 70). “Cross-cultural research is based on the comparison of two situations, in which most attention is given to the cultural aspects. A common product in this type of research is insight in cultural similarities and differences”. As mentioned above, this research explores the organisational cultures between Thales France and Thales Nederland. Therefore, based on the methodology, this research can be characterised as cross-cultural research.
4.2 Conceptual model
In this paragraph, a conceptual model, which is a “powerful tool to represent the different interrelated elements of a research” (De Leeuw, 2003: 56), is build. Further, an explanation of the conceptual model is also part of this paragraph. The conceptual model for this research is summarised in figure 4 on the following page.
Figure 4 Conceptual model
As can be seen in the conceptual model, the intercultural cooperation between Thales France and Thales Nederland is the main research topic. This study tries to give insight in the way the intercultural cooperation is influenced by the organisational cultures of both companies that operate in the cooperation. To generate this insight, the biggest task is to identify and describe both organisational cultures next to investigate how to manage a bi-cultural cooperation in a successful way.
Although “some specialists argue that national or regional culture is rarely present in firms”
(Rijamampianina & Maxwell, 2002: 1-2), this study assumes that an organisational culture is influenced by the national culture of the country, in which the organisation is situated. This assumption is also shown in the conceptual model, where the national cultures of France and the Netherlands have an impact on the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland. This research is thus in line with Adler (2002: 67), who states: “Employees and managers bring their cultural background and ethnicity to the workplace”. Harris & Moran (1991: 149), also state that “the micro culture is a reflection of the macro culture, the location of an organisation will be affected by the culture of the community that surrounds it”.
Following the assumption above, the national cultures of France and of the Netherlands need to be described in this study, next to both organisational cultures.
In the conceptual model, it is shown that the intercultural cooperation has an impact on the performance of Thales. So, if the intercultural cooperation and, thus, the influences of both organisational cultures on this, are managed successfully, it is assumed that Thales will achieve a better performance.
As mentioned in paragraph 3.4.3, a dynamic definition of an organisational culture is used.
This means that it is possible, according to this definition, that an organisational culture is altered or changed. The dotted line, from management to the organisational cultures, in the conceptual model shows this dynamics. Management is able to influence the organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland. Next to this, it is also assumed that management can influence the intercultural cooperation. The management is depicted in the
National Culture France
Organisational Culture Thales
France
Organisational Culture Thales
Nederland National Culture
the Netherlands
Intercultural cooperation Management
Performance
model by an oval figure, which is situated in between the national cultures and organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland. This is done, because the management consists of managers from France and the Netherlands (national cultures) and from Thales France and Thales Nederland (organisational cultures). This management is influenced by these four cultures, which is, again, represented by the dotted lines.
4.3 Operationalisation of research elements
In order to conduct research, the elements under research need to be quantifiable or measurable. “The meaning of the different elements needs to be clear and must be perceptible” (De Leeuw, 2003: 42). In paragraph 3.4, the meaning of the different aspects of this research has been discussed. In this paragraph, the elements under research, namely the national and organisational cultures of Thales France and Thales Nederland, are linked with the perceptible or observable world.
4.3.1 National culture
One of the methods that can be used to make a culture describable or perceptible is by using a number of dimensions. According to Chanchani & Theivanathampillai (2002: 3), the literature is “replete with cultural typologies drawn from theory and statistical techniques of factor analysis, smallest space analyses and standard analytic issues”. Chanchani &
Theivanathampillai discuss four of these sets of dimensions of culture and evaluate each set by using a number of criteria. The study by Chanchani & Theivanathampillai is used in this research to decide which typology of culture will be used. Further, the research shows that there is not one set of dimensions that can be seen as superior. The study places the typologies in a broader perspective.
4.3.1.1 Chanchani & Theivanathampillai’s study
As mentioned above, Chanchani & Theivanathampillai discuss four typologies of cultures, namely the typology of Hofstede (1980), Triandis (1994), Trompenaars (1993) and Fiske (1990, 1991, 1992). Three, for this research relevant, reasons are mentioned by Chanchani &
Theivanathampillai why they choose for these four typologies of culture. First, “many classifications forwarded in the literature are not systematic classifications of cultures, as these are neither located upon theories nor validated through statistical analysis” (2002: 22).
Second, “some classifications are rather protracted”. Third, some of the typologies overlap with the classifications chosen for discussion in their paper.
The five criteria with which the four typologies are evaluated are simplicity, ability to transcend levels of analysis, applicability to multiple research methods, identifying dominant themes and flexibility in understanding cultural change. Two of these criteria are not relevant for this research. The ability to transcend levels of analysis is not important in this thesis, because the level of analysis will not change. Only the national culture will be described by the typology chosen and, therefore, the level of analysis does not need to be altered. Further, the applicability to multiple research methods is also not relevant for this research. The national culture will be described by using literature and, therefore, the chosen typology does not need to be applicable to multiple research methods.
4.3.1.2 Choosing a suitable typology for this research
The first criterion that is relevant for this research is simplicity. According to Chanchani &
Theivanathampillai (2002: 3), cultural classifications should “synthesise rich, complex constructs into a small number of easily understandable, simple concepts”. Second, “cultures may have certain themes that are more dominant than other themes. A more useful cultural
