Changes in Russian Managerial Values

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Introduction

The article under consideration is titled Changes in Russian Managerial values: A test of the convergence hypothesis. Its authors are Yuri Alexashin and John Blenkinsopp, whose professions are the reputable Russian scientist from JSC Severstal and Reader in Management of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne Business School by their professions respectively. The full citation of the article is as follows:

Alexashin, Y., & Blenkinsopp, J. (2005). Changes in Russian Managerial values: A test of the convergence hypothesis. International Journal of HRM 16 (3), 427-444.

The purpose of this article is to trace the recent changes that have occurred in Russian managerial values and to see their main reasons by either confirming or rejecting the convergence hypothesis. Accordingly, the research question of the article is based on its hypothesis:

The managerial values of Russian managers will show convergence towards those of their US counterparts, as measured by the Schwartz Value Survey when compared to data from earlier research (Alexashin & Blenkinsopp, 2005, p. 436).

Such a research question is important as Russia is one of the countries to start transition to market economy only recently, and its efforts in modernizing its Human Resources Management values are rather interesting as both scholarly data and examples for other countries facing the same tasks.

Body

The methods used by the authors of the article are numerous and comprehensive. First of all, “longitudinal studies…for testing convergence – divergence hypothesis” are used together with “cross-sectional studies” (Alexashin & Blenkinsopp, 2005, p. 436) to research the connection between the HRM values in Russia and other countries including the USA. Also, the SVS questionnaire consisting of 56 questions was used to gather the one-time information from the research respondents. Before the very procedure, the questionnaire was examined by a group of Russian MBA students, who considered the questionnaire to be “clearly laid out” (Alexashin & Blenkinsopp, 2005, p. 436). Moreover, the research design consisted of 102 managers of senior, middle, and lower-level managers from Moscow-, St. Petersburg-, and Cherepovetz-based companies.

Based on the design mentioned and the sample of 102 managers, the study managed to find out the changes that occurred in managerial values in the USA and Russia in comparison to each other and to the previous research works by Halt et al. (1994) and Ralston et al. (1997). Ten criteria, including power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, benevolence, tradition, conformity, and security, were analyzed for coming to the following results. Power turned out to be the only managerial value to grow in importance in Russia and decrease in the US (3, 01 and 3, 52 respectively), while hedonism and conformity demonstrated the opposite trend (4, 21 and 4, 17 compared to 3, 99 and 3, 89 respectively). The rest of the values manifested convergence between the US and Russian managers (Alexashin & Blenkinsopp, 2005, p. 438).

As an outcome of the research described in the article by Alexashin & Blenkinsopp (2005), the assumption about the developing similarities between the managerial values between the US and Russian managers in the HRM sphere can be admitted. The analysis of the ten major managerial values as presented by the SVS questionnaire provided the authors with the information about the convergence, which HRM managers in the two countries under analysis display. Despite the two points that show divergence, the overall trend is towards integration and possible intercultural exchange of knowledge. Although Alexashin & Blenkinsopp (2005) stress the cultural peculiarities of Russia as the major obstacle on the way of this managerial values convergence, they conclude by saying that “the cultural foundation for the cross-national transfer of knowledge [can] take place successfully” (Alexashin & Blenkinsopp, 2005, p. 442).

Drawing from all the above-considered data, it is obvious that the article by Alexashin & Blenkinsopp (2005) displays its strong and weak points. The former includes the list of the following ideas. First, the article under analysis is a well-documented research work that depends on its theoretical considerations on both Alexashin & Blenkinsopp’s (2005) thoughts and data obtained by Hofstede (1993), Lewis (1999), etc. Moreover, the strong point of the article by Alexashin & Blenkinsopp (2005) is its close consideration of the peculiarities of the Russian national culture and the specialties that the nation of this country has in respect of subordination, work, development, etc. The authors consider such aspects of the Russian culture as uncertainty avoidance, individualism vs. collectivism fighting, power distance keeping, masculinity vs. femininity in the Russian society, and the relation of all these factors to the development of business organization and culture in Russia of today (Alexashin & Blenkinsopp, 2005, pp. 431 – 433).

However, the weak points can also be observed in this article. First of all, the attention paid to the Russian issues in HRM management development is a necessary but a rather sudden phenomenon. The American society is not ready for its thorough consideration as its knowledge of the Russian reality today is not substantial, and the brief accounts presented by Alexashin & Blenkinsopp (2005) cannot solve this issue alone. Another weak point of the article is its rather narrow sample and the absence of measures of the possible mistakes or survey errors. The research involving 102 respondents is a large one but the outcomes of such a work cannot be applied to the national or international scope because of their small number. To achieve international credibility, the research should operate with larger numbers of respondents and study the managerial values peculiarities in a larger number of countries and cultures. Nevertheless, all the strong and weak points of the article and the study considered, I would still recommend this work to all the scholars and students dealing with the international peculiarities of HRM development and the influence of cultural factors upon the latter. The information I learned from this article concerns mainly the typical features of the Russian culture and the ways in which the latter either facilitates or prevents the Russian HRM sphere from fruitful and fast development.

Conclusion

Discussion Summary

To conclude, this paper has analyzed the article Changes in Russian Managerial values: A test of the convergence hypothesis by Yuri Alexashin and John Blenkinsopp. This article studies the recent changes in the Russian HRM managerial values and traces the possibility of convergence between the values of the Russian and the US managers in the HRM spheres. Using cross-sectional study and SVS questionnaire the authors arrive at the conclusion that Russian and US HRM spheres have displayed considerable convergence recently. Thus, I consider this article to be a valuable source of information on HRM development and I learn from it a lot of new and interesting information. However, the drawbacks of the research by Alexashin & Blenkinsopp (2005) leave implications for future research that include the increase in scope and sample and greater generalization possibility of the data.

References

Alexashin, Y., & Blenkinsopp, J. (2005). Changes in Russian Managerial values: A test of the convergence hypothesis. International Journal of HRM 16 (3), 427-444.

Click Here To Order Now!

Changes in Russian Managerial Values

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)