Cultural differences a sacred cow?

Cultural differences a sacred cow?

By Donna K. Woodward

MEDAN (JP): Last Dec. 30 The Jakarta Post carried a report
from Coordinating Minister for the Economy, Finance and Industry
Kwik Kian Gie about the state-run electricity firm's loss of Rp 5
trillion because of poor management. In an ironic juxtaposition,
in the same issue there was an article by consultant James O'Hara
discussing Indonesian companies' fear of introducing management
change.

If foreign consultants working in Indonesia share any
experience, it is probably that of having one's recommendations
ignored if not expressly rejected by clients. As noted by O'Hara,
recommended changes are sometimes avoided because business
executives believe that change is an admission of inadequacy and
tantamount to a loss of face.

Sometimes changes are postponed out of complacency; there is
no perceived need for change so long as business results are
considered satisfactory.

There is a third reason sometimes proffered for rejecting the
changes recommended by foreign consultants. Some business
executives contend that what works in other countries simply will
not work in Indonesia because of incompatible cultural values.

Experts try to articulate what these cultural values and
differences are. (The term "culture" itself presents a problem of
definition, especially in Indonesia, where culture is actually a
potpourri of cultures.)

Cultural variety is seductive and exhilarating. But as we also
see, culture-based variations in belief and behavior can become
barriers to understanding and cooperation. The management changes
which most often meet resistance from managers are those relating
to human resource management: to performance standards and
workplace values.

Because of their culture, Indonesians cannot be expected to
report to work on time, to complete assignments according to
instructions, to be self-reliant and use initiative to solve
problems, to work industriously, to be truthful about what
something costs, to be trustworthy about financial
responsibility, to meet obligations to an employer if there is a
competing family obligation.

These stereotypical opinions are commonly offered as a
rationale for not entrusting employees with more responsibility
and not improving their salaries, and for permitting unacceptable
work habits. And it is not necessarily foreign managers who say
these things; Indonesian managers make the same comments.

They turn the notion of cultural differences into a sacred
cow, using it to rationalize conduct that would not otherwise be
acceptable. Some Indonesian employees do embody such
shortcomings, as do their counterparts in New York or Frankfurt
or Melbourne.

Other Indonesian workers defy these stereotypes. No, the
problem is not one of immutable cultural differences. Nor is the
problem the poor quality of human resources in Indonesia. The
biggest handicap of Indonesian workers is the antiquated human
resource management styles favored by both Indonesian and
expatriate-managed companies.

In a cheap labor environment, companies find it easier to live
with the status quo of poor performance and low productivity than
to introduce change.

Managers decline to introduce modern management principles and
employee incentives, and then in a fallacy of circular reasoning
cite continuing poor worker productivity to justify a refusal to
implement modern human resource management methods.

Employers tolerate employees' misuse of work hours, excessive
absenteeism, petty corruption and misappropriation of company
property and other costly, profit-reducing practices; yet wages
are kept discouragingly low.

Counterproductive labor laws protect workers excessively from
termination for poor performance, but sanction substandard wage
rates. Qualified employees are denied employment because of their
religion or ethnicity, while the less qualified are often given
preferred positions because they have the right backgrounds or
connections.

Progressive human resource management is an idea whose time
has not yet come to Indonesia. Instead of millennium-era employee
relations we see a combination of benevolent despotism and
outright repressiveness in the workplace, whether the workplace
is a factory, a fish farm, a hospital or a bank. (Government
offices are a little different, since to prevent mutiny the civil
servants and troops are given leeway for the lucrative practice
of corruption, collusion and nepotism, or KKN.)

Are cultural differences really so deep and insurmountable
that modern management principles like accountability and mutual
respect cannot be translated successfully into policies and
practices in Indonesia?

Employers who have genuinely given modern management
principles a try would say no. Outmoded human resource
management, not culture, is the real enemy of Indonesian workers.
Cultural differences are real, but if we should not disregard
their significance neither should we sanctify them.

Let managers hold employees accountable for their performance.
Let companies commit themselves to modern human resource
management methods and KKN-free standards of employee conduct.

Let the government revise labor laws to mandate adequate wages
and working conditions, but also permit appropriate discipline
for non-performing employees. Let companies not fear change for
the wrong reasons. Do not let cultural differences become an
excuse for avoiding management reform. Do not demean Indonesian
culture and handicap Indonesian workers from a misbegotten
tolerance.

The writer, an attorney and former American diplomat at the
U.S. Consulate General in Medan, is president director of PT Far
Horizons, a management consultancy firm.