Executive Vice President, Mr Scott Woroch, is worried about the prospects of achieving successful change management processes in hotels located in countries with different cultures. He asks for your opinion:
(A) From a leadership and cultural adaptation perspective, do you agree with the appointment of Mr Le Calvez as the new General Manager (in Paris) – why/why not?
(B) Contemplating on increased international travel and tourism, as well as intensified globalisation (also in the socio-cultural realm) – discuss if Four Seasons should continue with the approaches known as “tailor made” hotels and “cultural chameleons”? Would you prefer to change this practice – why/why not?
(C) Identify relevant levels/spheres of culture that you need to take into account when implementing change interventions in the new hotel where you work as the GM?
(D) Critically evaluate the limitations of grasping intercultural challenges within the Four Seasons organisation, if relying solely on Hofstede’s (1980) ‘Cultural Dimensions’ approach, and Kogut and Sing’s (1988) ‘Cultural Distance’ construct?
Taking into account Four Season’s organisational culture and the cultural environment in the city/country where you have been appointed as the new GM, highlight potential intercultural challenges which you (as the GM) might face when adopting the specific Four Season ‘s organisational culture in the new hotel in relation to local staff.
Support your argument by using two human resource practices from the Case Study as examples, and explain by analysing a minimum of three (across both HR practices) factors which may reflect cultural “clash”, and cultural “fit”?
Recommend to Mr Scott Woroch what top-management should emphasise (as a means to motivate new local staff-members to participate in change management processes) when explaining the implementation phase of change processes in a culturally effective fashion.
Identify a particular implementation approach (grounded in theory), and use this as an example when providing your answer to this question.
Mr Scott Woroch has some doubts as to whether you possess the appropriate intercultural skill-set for embarking on the role as GM at the new hotel. He requests that you reflect upon your intercultural capabilities – as he believes increased cultural self-awareness leads to enhanced decision-making. Complete the below form – focusing on yourself as an individual (GM) (attach as an appendix – it does not count towards the word limit).
Your Intercultural Strengths
Your Intercultural Weaknesses
US Public Attitudes Towards Welfare State | Research Study Distributed: sixteenth October, 2017 Last Edited: sixteenth October, 2017 Disclaimer: This exposition has been presented by an understudy. This isn't a case of the work composed by our expert exposition authors. You can see tests of our expert work here. Any assessments, discoveries, conclusions or suggestions communicated in this material are those of the writers and don't really mirror the perspectives of UK Essays. Tim Mulligan Business and Attitudes toward People on Welfare Welfare is one of the United States most unmistakable political issues. Since the U.S welfare framework was built up in 1935, its monetary structure, the wellspring of its financing and the capabilities of its beneficiaries have been ceaseless subjects of verbal confrontation. On account of America's exceptionally assorted populace, a plenty of states of mind have created in regards to the way that individuals see welfare beneficiaries, and this might be credited to a wide range of variables. I volunteered look all the more particularly at the connection between people who work (or don't work) and individuals who are on welfare. The inquiry that I chose to explore was, "completes a person's business status impact their demeanor towards individuals who are on welfare?" I trust this is a vital inquiry to deliver in light of the fact that individuals have a tendency to sum up that people who work have cruelly contrary mentalities toward individuals getting welfare checks since they don't need to work for the cash. On the off chance that this is in truth evident, at that point I trust it would assume a gigantic part in the results of numerous races and in addition how states sort out their welfare frameworks. My speculation is Ha: in an examination of people, the individuals who are as of now working will have more pessimistic sentiments towards individuals who are on welfare than people who are not working. My invalid theory would be H0: there is no connection between a person's work status and their sentiments toward individuals who are on welfare. I trust my theory to be genuine in light of the fact that I figure it would be elusive a man who works and strives to get a wage and is likewise tolerant of different people who are accepting cash without working. A few people may feel that their work and endeavors are disparaged on the grounds that people who don't advance a similar exertion can even now assert a "salary". There may likewise be people who had encountered money related hardship (in the same way as other of the general population who use welfare) however worked their way once more into budgetary security without the guide of welfare. These individuals may have a more pessimistic "in the event that I could do it, at that point they ought to have the capacity to do it" mentality towards individuals on welfare. I think this speculation is pertinent to people in a wide range of occupations however much more so to people in the difficult work compel. Individuals who work bring down paying difficult work occupations could have to a great degree contrary perspectives towards individuals who are welfare since they are physically striving while welfare beneficiaries might not need to do as such themselves. On the opposite end of my theory, people who are not utilized could have more constructive sentiments toward individuals on welfare for a few reasons. The most striking reason is that there is likely a higher shot that people who are not utilized may in actuality be accepting welfare help themselves. I don't trust that people who are as of now on welfare will have adverse emotions towards the plain program that they are utilizing. Another factor could be people who are not really "out of the activity" but rather are basically not currently hoping to work. For instance, housewives, non-working understudies and youthful grown-ups might not have an indistinguishable adverse emotions from somebody who is utilized on the grounds that they don't have a vocation or wage to contrast and those of individuals who are on welfare. These gatherings of individuals might not have the same "put down" feeling that utilized individuals may have and they may have more unbiased or constructive emotions towards individuals who are on welfare. The informational collection that I utilized for my examination is nes2008. This dataset is from an American National Election Time Series Study which occurred in 2008. 4,424 aggregate people were met on an up close and personal premise, 2,322 people previously the presidential decision and 2,102 people after the presidential race. As can be accepted by the vis-à-vis surveying the unit of examination for this investigation was people. (ANES) The respectability of this informational collection is solid in how the people were surveyed on a wide assortment of points, for example, their voting investment, values, commonality with the media and their belief systems. This guarantees the people don't feel just as they are being met for a particular subject or to answer a particular inquiry which could influenced their answers a less exact way. The extensive number of individuals who were inspected is likewise a positive part of the informational index. Despite the fact that four thousand individuals may not splendidly speak to the conclusions of the whole populace of the U.S, the example measure is sufficiently expansive to produce no less than an adequate portrayal. (ANES) Then again, the nes2008 informational collection has a couple of negative attributes. The meeting of people pre-and-post-race may have produced comes about that conflictingly speak to the U.S populace due such that the decision may have had on a few people's perspectives or answers. In spite of the fact that the two floods of interviewees comprised of various individuals, the race may have impacted people to react all the more emphatically or adversely to specific inquiries in light of the result of the race. The populace could have been spoken to far contrastingly before the race than after the race. This might be an impact that the investigation was attempting to incite, yet for my exploration it doesn't create the best portrayal of the populace. Another issue with the nes2008 informational collection is that there was a planned oversampling of African-American and Latino respondents. This oversampling presents another issue with respect to the investigations portrayal of the overall public as it may exclude the same number of answers from different races that could influence my testing results. Fortunately, the informational collection incorporated an equation that would measure the information in a way that would better speak to the populace. (ANES) The reliant variable that I chose was welfare_therm. This is a consistent variable that requests people to rate the glow of their emotions toward individuals who are on welfare from 0º (coldest) to 100º (hottest). It is inferred that hotter emotions are more positive than colder sentiments. This was a decent factor for me to utilize in light of the fact that the inquiry that I am attempting to answer relates to person's emotions toward individuals who are on welfare. I think rating their emotions in degrees as opposed to classes like "contrary", "marginally antagonistic", "impartial" et cetera takes into consideration people to be more particular while depicting their sentiments towards individuals on welfare. Despite the fact that, I do trust that the extensive variety of the thermometer may realize a less authoritative portrayal of what is viewed as a somewhat constructive or somewhat pessimistic inclination toward individuals who are on welfare. A diagram portraying welfare_therm can be found in figure 1. My fundamental free factor was employ_status, which had people distinguish themselves inside work status classes. These classes were: working presently, incidentally laid off, jobless, resigned, forever handicapped, homemaker, and understudy. At initially, this variable did not present the most legitimate estimation of work status that I would requirement for my examination. To create a superior portrayal of the emotions produced by people who were working or not working, I needed to refine the quantity of classifications in the variable. I recoded the variable with the goal that a person's reaction would either enroll as A. working or B. not working. This new factor was called working and would fill in as a superior variable for estimating an association with my reliant variable, sentiments toward individuals on welfare. A diagram portraying working can be found in figure 2. The first of my control factors was sexual orientation. This variable ordered individual respondents as either male or female. It is essential to take note of that due to how this variable was coded in Stata (1=male, 2=female), I expected to recode it so it would be all the more effortlessly estimated by my tests. I recoded the variable as 0=male and 1=female and I named the new factor female. I incorporated this control variable since I trusted that a person's sexual orientation would largy affect the emotions that they had towards individuals who are on welfare. Characteristically ladies are thought to be more passionate and thoughtful towards people who might be in need and I felt this may affect their demeanor towards a man who is on welfare. The second control variable that I incorporated into my test was hh_kids, which is an all out measure of the quantity of children in the respondent's family unit. 0=no children 1=one child and at least 2=two children in the family. I trust that this variable would have served my examination better if the classes spoke to the dynamic of family units with few children and families with numerous children better. Maybe classifications, for example, 0 kids, 1-3 children and at least 3 children would have been exceptional on the grounds that I don't believe that 2 kids speaks to a family unit with "many" children, which was the dynamic I was planning to quantify. I do trust that this variable is adequate, however. I trust that the quantity of children that an individual has in their family unit impacts their sentiments toward individuals on welfare since people with numerous kids may comprehend what it resembles to be on a tight spending plan or to need to accommodate youngsters. Individuals with numerous children in their home>GET ANSWER