Question 1 (AC 1.1) Drawing on Geert Hofstede’s cultural mapping research, examine the major ways in which UK and Japanese workplace cultures differ from each other and how this may pose significant challenges for your organisation in the future following the takeover.
Cultural dimensions theory
Geert Hofstede’s theory of cultural dimensions offers an important framework from which to interpret the large variations between UK and Japanese workplace cultures. A striking difference is in Power Distance. Japan ranks higher, which suggests a stronger acceptance of hierarchical constructs and power disparities (Hofstede, 2011, 8). In Japanese workplaces, respect for seniority and authority is paramount, with decisions often flowing from the top down. The UK, with a lower score, exhibits a more egalitarian approach, where consultation and collaboration across different levels are more common.
Individualism versus Collectivism also reveals a stark difference. Japan is a highly collectivist society, emphasizing group harmony, loyalty, and interdependence (Kang and Fornes, 2017, 296). Individual achievement is often downplayed in favor of collective success. Decision-making is consensus-driven, and maintaining harmonious relationships within the group is crucial. The UK, conversely, is a highly individualistic society, prioritizing personal achievement, independence, and self-reliance. Employees are encouraged to take initiative and are rewarded for individual contributions. Masculinity vs. Femininity provides another main discrepancy. Japan is a very masculine country score with emphasis on achievement, competition and material success. High performance, prolonged working hours and devotion to the employer are frequently expected, especially amongst men. The UK, despite being also masculine scores lower, suggesting emphasis on work-life balance and a more nurturing approach to management.
Uncertainty Avoidance is another significant differentiator. Japan scores very high, reflecting a strong preference for structure, rules, and predictability (Sakikawa, 2024). Ambiguity and uncertainty are usually experienced with unease, leading to meticulous planning and risk aversion. The UK, with a lower score, is accustomed to ambiguity and to change easily. People are more open to take risks and to innovate. Lastly, Long-Term versus Short-Term Orientation highlights differing perspectives on time and planning. Japan is quite high on long-term orientation – grit, thrift, and reward focussed on the future. Investments in the long-term and in deep relationships are cultivated. The UK, with a more short-term orientation, places greater emphasis on immediate results and quick returns. There appears to be more emphasis placed on short-term profit and achieving quarterly goals. Such disparities have a deep effect on how work is done, communication, and management, and merit attention when working across cultures.
Possible challenges
The cultural differences as shown by Hofstede’s model create very challenging situations for our company after the takeover. The seniority structure of the Japanese system may not match the more egalitarian UK system, and this could result in confusion and dissatisfaction among staff who are used to having a high degree of autonomy (Kang and Fornes, 2017, 296). The existence of a strong collectivist emphasis in Japan may generate conflict with the UK’s individualist society, in which personal praise and enterprise are important. UK staff could perceive the Japanese consensus-based process of decision-making to be slow and inefficient, and Japanese managers could perceive UK staff as being unfairly disengaged from team spirit. The presence of high uncertainty avoidance in Japan may limit innovation and risk taking in the UK operations, the latter of which are more flexible. Ultimately, the contrasting time orientations could lead to disagreements on project timelines and investment strategies. Overcoming these cultural barriers will be essential for successful assimilation and smooth integration, and the strategic handling and cross-cultural education necessary to promote mutual comprehension and harmony will also be important. Ignoring the effects of these biases could have detrimental effects of morale, productivity, and, in the end, on the success of the acquisition.
Question 2 (AC 1.2) Assess the benefits to your company of employing people in an international context following the takeover.
Employing people in an international context following the takeover offers several significant benefits to our company (Gaughan, 2010). Firstly, it provides access to a wider talent pool. Through recruitment on a global scale, we can access specialised skills and knowledge which may otherwise be unlikely in the UK. This is especially useful in the pharmaceutical field, where there is a definite need for specialized scientific or technical knowledge. Secondly, international hiring fosters greater diversity within the organization. This heterogeneity of thought, experience, cultural and societal backgrounds can result in enhanced creativity, innovation and problem solving abilities. It can also improve our conception of the various markets and customer unsatisfied needs, which is certainly a decisive factor for a company a global expansion drive. Third, the employment of Japanese workers allows for the most natural interaction and communication with the parent company. Utilizing UK-based employees in the same team as their Japanese colleagues can help increase knowledge transfer, enhance relationships, and provide quicker decision making. This can be particularly useful for better understanding the cultural nuances and facilitating a more seamless merging of the two entities. Fourthly, international assignments are providing our employees with exciting developmental experiences. These activities can improve their skill in cross-cultural communication, enhance their global understanding, and develop their ability for adaptability and, as a result, be more successful leaders and managers in a world becoming ever more globalized. Presently, a better international footprint can help to improve our company image as well as the image of our brand. It shows an openness to global markets which may both attract customers and recruits who are interested in a global experience and cultural diversity.
Question 3 (AC 1.3) Explain why there is typically some tension in multi-national companies between a wish to adhere to global corporate standards and norms when managing people, and an equally strong need to respect established local standards and norms. How can this tension best be resolved in your company as it prepares to implement the proposed takeover?
The tension between global corporate standards and local norms
The tension between complying with global corporate practices and giving greater weight to local customs in multinational enterprises develops from the fundamental conflict between maintaining consistency and demonstrating sensitivity for different cultures (Knorringa & Nadvi, 2016, 55). Global corporate practices, which are usually conceived with uniformity, effectiveness, and corporate image in mind, may directly conflict with a traditional local culture..
From a corporate perspective, maintaining consistent HR practices, such as performance management systems, compensation structures, and training programs, can streamline operations, facilitate internal mobility, and reinforce a unified company culture (Wei-Liang and Mei Ling, 2018, 3068). These standardized approaches often reflect the values and norms of the company’s home country. On the other hand, the introduction of these standards in the absence of consideration for local aspects can provoke resistance, reduced employee morale, and even legal trouble.
Local norms, shaped by cultural, social, and historical factors, influence how people perceive work, authority, communication, and interpersonal relationships (Wei-Liang and Mei Ling, 2018, 3068). For example, direct feedback, common in some cultures, might be considered rude or disrespectful in others. Similarly, work-life balance expectations, preferred communication styles, and even appropriate workplace attire can vary significantly across different countries. Ignoring these local nuances can create misunderstandings, damage relationships, and hinder productivity. Furthermore, legal and regulatory frameworks differ significantly across countries, particularly in areas like employment law, data protection, and anti-discrimination. Multinational companies must comply with local laws, even if they conflict with global corporate policies. This can create complex situations where companies need to adapt their practices to meet local legal requirements while maintaining a degree of global consistency.
Therefore, multinational companies face a constant balancing act. They must define clear global standards that deliver operational efficiency and standardize brand image, all while adhering to a degree of flexibility and adaption to localise norms and local legal requirements, while simultaneously finding a way to honour and to account for all of those local dimensions, in order to create an environment of jobs which is supportive, build relationships of trust with the local community and, above all, achieve a sustainable market in the global space.
How to resolve the tension during takeover
Resolving the tension between global corporate standards and local norms during the takeover requires demands a rather nuanced balancing act performed by means of dialogue, cultural awareness, and joint policy making (Thelisson, 2023, 381). Open lines of communication between the UK and Japanese work force are of fundamental importance and it is essential to stimulate dialogue and cultural understanding through regular contact, cross-cultural training and common experience. Comprehensive cross-cultural training, particularly for managers, is essential, focusing on understanding cultural nuances in communication, work ethics, and management styles, emphasizing respect for local norms and adaptable behaviors. However, it is important not to introduce the global standards without a collective approach–both teams at UK and Japanese sides should be actively involved in designing policies. This guarantees attention is given to local point of view, adapting the policy to local demands and at the same time providing global uniformity. Recognizing that a uniform approach is ineffective, flexibility in implementing global standards is necessary, adapting them to respect local norms and legal requirements (Thelisson, 2023, 381). This may require changes to performance management systems in order to better reflect feedback styles in the culture or to adapt remuneration to compensate for market realities in the local jurisdiction. Engaging local HR practitioners and lawyer expertise for both areas is critical, and drawing upon their knowledge of local laws, regulations, and ethnocultural factors when navigating issues and adhering to the law is important. Implementing new policies through pilot programs before full rollout allows for feedback and adjustments based on practical experience. Finally, continuous monitoring and evaluation of HR policies and practices in both regions, gathering feedback from employees and managers, enables ongoing improvement and adaptation. This integrated strategy allows our company to achieve a balance between global standardization and consideration of local differences, and creates a positive work environment that facilitates a seamless and effective integration following a takeover.
Question 4 (AC 2.1) Assess the major short term people management factors that your company will need to consider during the next few months as the implications of the takeover become clear to the workforce.
The immediate months following the takeover will be a period of significant uncertainty and change for our workforce, requiring careful attention to several key people management factors (Timsina, 2024). Firstly, communication is paramount. Rumours and conjecture are likely to spread quickly, causing anxiety and possibly affecting morale and productivity. Therefore, establishing clear, consistent, and transparent communication channels is crucial. This includes an immediate communication of the rationale behind the takeover, its foreseen effects on the personnel and the plans of the company concerning integration. Regular postings, town halls, and Q&As will be able to facilitate dialogue in responding to employee concerns and help foster trust. It is also important to recognize the unknown and refrain from giving guarantees that cannot be met. Secondly, managing employee anxiety and morale is essential. The takeover will inevitably generate feelings of insecurity, particularly regarding job security and potential changes to working conditions. Proactive measures to address these concerns are necessary, such as providing reassurance about job security where possible, outlining clear transition plans, and offering support services like employee assistance programs. It is important to show empathy and understanding of employee worries in order to maintain positivity and avoid causing problems.
Thirdly, managing potential resistance to change is vital. There may be a resistance among certain employees to the changes triggered by the takeover, if these changes are seen as possibly undesirable or disruptive (Timsina, 2024). Actionable change management tactics are required to counter this barrier. This includes actively involving employees in the transition process, collecting their ideas, and dealing with these issues. Openness and transparency with how the takeover will work, as well as its advantages to individuals and teams, will help to dispel resistance and cultivate buy in. Fourthly, maintaining business continuity is crucial. In the transitional phase, it is crucial that the normal run of business is not disrupted. This calls for transparent agreements on tasks and responsibilities, that pertinent tasks do not get lost, and for proper support for employees while they become accustomed to new processes and new systems. Open communication between the UK and Japanese teams constituted an essential tool for planning activities and a smooth transition.
Fifthly, managing cultural integration is a key short-term priority. Integration of two different organizational cultures can be complex (Timsina, 2024). There is value in nurturing UK and Japanese staff understanding and tolerance of each other. Cross-cultural training, language assistance and opportunities to interact may help overcome cultural differences and ensure successful teamwork. Finally, talent retention is a crucial short-term consideration. Key employees may worry about their future in the merged firm and may be tempted to go in for other jobs. Implementing strategies to retain top talent is vital, such as communicating clear career progression opportunities, providing competitive compensation and benefits, and recognizing and rewarding employee contributions. Addressing these factors effectively in the immediate aftermath of the takeover will be crucial for minimizing disruption, maintaining morale, and ensuring a smooth and successful integration.
Question 5 (AC 2.2) Explain two major ways in which employment and labour market traditions vary between the UK and Japan. Illustrate each with a practical example.
Lifetime employment
There are two broad areas where employment and labour market traditions in the UK and Japan diverge in terms the concepts of lifetime employment and the nature of trade unionism. Japan has historically been associated with the practice of lifetime employment (shushin koyo), though its prevalence has decreased in recent decades (Ono, 2018, 2). This tradition implied a strong commitment from companies to retain employees until retirement, providing job security and fostering a sense of loyalty and belonging. In exchange, employees are expected to demonstrate unwavering commitment to the company, often accepting internal transfers and adapting to changing business needs. This system fostered long-term skill development within organizations and contributed to a strong sense of corporate identity. A practical example of this is the practice of internal promotion and training within Japanese companies. Rather than bringing in people from outside for senior management jobs, companies generally promote people who have worked their way up the ranks over a period of years in roles that have exposed them to different departments. This internal focus on development reflects the long-term investment inherent in the lifetime employment system. On the other hand, the labour market in the UK has traditionally been defined as having high labour mobility and informal commitment to employment in the long term. Employees are more likely to change jobs throughout their careers, seeking better opportunities or career advancement elsewhere. Companies, on the other hand, tend to fill specific skill gaps by hiring externally. This leads to a more dynamic labor market but also a decreased job security in comparison to the traditional, Japanese mechanism. One practical illustration of this can be seen in the trend of fixed-term contracts and agency work in the UK where employers enjoy significant flexibility in their workforce but in turn can leave workers with no guarantees of a job.
Trade unionism
The nature of trade unionism, however, is also different between the two countries. In Japan, enterprise unions are the dominant form of union organization (Kawanishi, 2021). These unions are organized at the company level, encompassing both blue-collar and white-collar workers within a single enterprise. This structure fosters a cooperative relationship between management and labor, with unions often prioritizing the company’s success alongside the interests of their members. Negotiations usually address wages, working conditions, and employees’ welfare under the framework of the company’s performance. A practical instance of this is the yearly spring wage negotiation (shunto), in which enterprise unions make agreements with employment management in different fields to set a wage increase in next year. This has a focus on consensus and works to make labor relations smoother. The trade unions in the UK are organized traditionally on an industry or occupation basis, covering workers of various companies in each sector. This organization can also evolve into an antagonistic relationship between management and labor, with the latter generally adopting a more adversarial posture in order to defend workers’ rights and working conditions. Collective bargaining often focuses on broader industry-wide issues, such as national pay scales or working time regulations. A practical example is the involvement of UK trade unions in national strikes or campaigns to advocate for improved pay and working conditions for workers across a specific industry, such as the public sector or the railway industry. These differences in employment practices and trade unionism reflect deeper cultural and historical contexts, shaping the dynamics of the labor market in each country.
Question 6 (AC 2.3) Evaluate two major ways in which common people management practices differ between the UK and Japan.
Performance management
Two significant areas of divergence in common people management practices between the UK and Japan lie in performance management and decision-making processes. Performance management in the UK is normally focused on the individual performance (regular performance appraisals centre around the individual achievement, targets and what is to be improved), where performance-related pay, bonuses and promotion are frequently at the individual level performance metric tied to it (Shimizu, 2017). Feedback is typically specific and direct, as managers offer clear examples of both strength and weakness. Individual responsibility and competition are fostered in this system, praise is intended for high performers, while the performance areas in need of improvement are also detected. Conversely, performance management in Japan traditionally places greater emphasis on group performance and teamwork. Individual contributions are evaluated within the context of the team’s overall success, and individual recognition is often less pronounced than in the UK. Performance appraisals may focus more on broader qualities such as teamwork, cooperation, and dedication to the company, rather than solely on individual output. Feedback tends to be more indirect and subtle, with managers prioritizing the maintenance of harmony and avoiding direct criticism that might cause embarrassment or disharmony. This paradigm builds up a sense of shared responsibility and motivates individuals to participate collaboratively to reach shared objectives..
Decision-making
Decision-making processes also differ substantially. In the UK, decision-making is often more centralized, with managers or senior leaders taking responsibility for making key decisions (Elwyn et al, 2017, 359). While consultation may occur, the final decision typically rests with the individual in authority. This process can be quite fast and efficient and is thus able to respond in a timely fashion to changing conditions. In Japan, the ringi-sho system is a very common decision making process. It consists of circulating to those concerned with a proposal document, allowing them to read it, write a letter of opinion and affix a seal of approval. The whole process is based on consensus and seeks to get buy-in for everyone involved before finally making a decision. While this process can be slow, it guarantees that all voices are heard and there is a shared feeling of ownership of the final decision. This stems from collectivist cultural values in Japan, such that harmony and consensus among groups are paramount. These differences with the Western approach can create conflicts in the performance of both societies when working together, requiring managers to adapt their behaviour in order to effectively manage cultures and reach organizational goals.
Question 7 (AC 3.1) Explain the main role and function of a well-run and effective international people management function.
Managing human capital
The main role of a well-run and effective international people management function is to strategically manage human capital across national borders, aligning human resource practices with the organization’s global business strategy (Sparrow, Brewster and Chung, 2016). This involves a complex interplay of activities aimed at attracting, developing, motivating, and retaining a diverse and globally dispersed workforce. One key function is global talent management, encompassing activities like international recruitment, selection, and onboarding. This requires understanding different labor markets, legal frameworks, and cultural contexts to effectively source and select the best talent globally. It also involves designing effective onboarding programs that address the specific needs of international hires, facilitating their integration into the organization and the local work environment.
International training and development
Another crucial function is international training and development, which focuses on equipping employees with the skills and knowledge needed to succeed in a global context (Sal and Raja, 2016, 5). This includes cross-cultural training to enhance intercultural communication and understanding, language training to facilitate effective communication across different languages, and leadership development programs that prepare individuals for global leadership roles. Managing international assignments is also a core function, involving the planning, implementation, and support of employee transfers across national borders. This includes pre-departure preparation, relocation assistance, ongoing support during the assignment, and repatriation upon completion. Effective management of international assignments is crucial for ensuring the success of global projects and initiatives. Furthermore, international compensation and benefits management is a complex but essential function. This involves designing compensation packages that are competitive in local markets while also maintaining internal equity across the organization. It also requires navigating different tax laws, social security systems, and benefit regulations in various countries. Finally, fostering positive employee relations in a global context is a crucial function. This involves understanding and respecting diverse cultural norms and labor laws, building trust and open communication with employees across different locations, and resolving conflicts effectively. A well-functioning international people management function plays a vital role in enabling organizations to achieve their global strategic objectives by effectively managing their most valuable asset: their people.
Question 8 (AC 3.2) Consider the features of people management in a typical Japanese company employing professional staff. Which would you like to see adopted by your workplace? Which would you prefer to see not adopted?
Long-term employment and internal promotion
Personnel management in a standard Japanese organisation that uses professional staff is frequently marked by its own special features, some of which may be helpful if transferred to ours, whilst others are inappropriate (Chang and Shim, 2015, 1297). A defining characteristic is the focus on career-long employment and internal mobility. This leads to a high degree of loyalty and attachment in employees, and further motivates them to put in their stake to the future of the company. The focus on internal development through job rotation and continuous training allows employees to gain diverse skills and experience within the organization, creating a highly adaptable and knowledgeable workforce. This method, if implemented selectively, can help improve employee retention and build a more knowledgeable internal pool of talent in our organisation. A second important attribute is the focus on group cohesion and harmony (wa). Decision-making is frequently consensus-based with considerable consultation in an attempt to reach group agreement. This can generate the impression of common ownership and responsibility to decisions. Complete adoption of the ringi-sho system may be impractical for our busy environment, but integrating aspects of shared decision-making and seeking wider feedback may enhance team solidarity and buy-in.
Seniority and hierarchical structures
Still, certain aspects of Japanese people management might not be appropriate for our situation. Overhwelming hierarchical structures and emphasis on seniority may sometimes hamper innovation and creativity (Watanabe and Watanabe, 2018, 15). Younger staff may have the impression that their concerns are not considered, and processes for decision-making work to a slower pace because a consensus is required at every stage. This uniform hierarchy would most probably be at odds with our current work organization, which is more egalitarian in its nature. Furthermore, the expectation of long working hours and dedication to the company, often at the expense of personal life, is a feature that I would strongly prefer not to see adopted. However, both commitment and work-life balance/employee well-being are crucial to get the long-term productivity and satisfaction among our members. The indirect, unspoken communication patterns that are common in Japanese environments, for example, to foster harmony, may sometimes also result in incongruence and vagueness. Direct and open communication is typically looked upon favorably in our office setting and ensuring transparency of that communication is of ultimate importance to good teamwork. Thus, although certain factors such as long-term growth and team-based decision making could be advantageous if adopted carefully, the top-down hierarchy, too much work hours and indirect communication that the typical Japanese company follows will almost certainly be negative in our current workplace culture.
Question 9 (AC 4.1) Evaluate the potential advantages of expatriating Japanese staff to work in the UK and vice versa.
Expatriating Japanese staff to the UK offers a number of possible benefits (Tahir, 2022, 894). It allows an unmediated transfer of the parent company culture, values, and operational procedures, which helps to make the integration after acquisition a much smoother process. Japanese expatriates may serve to act as a link, which obviates the need for translators and bridge cultural and language differences between the UK teams and their Japanese colleagues. They can also offer specialist expertise where needed, such as in manufacturing techniques or quality management, and by doing so improve efficiency and productivity for UK operations. In turn, the sending of UK employees to Japan offers them significant personal and professional development experiences, specifically by improving their cross-cultural communication ability and globality. It also enables them to learn more about the parent company culture and how the company works, which they can then disseminate to UK colleagues upon their return. This bidirectional exchange builds up better relationships between the two subjects, encourages mutual learning and makes the creation of a truly global organizational culture possible. It can also create future global leaders having significant international experience.
Question 10 (AC 4.2) Explain which personal attributes and competencies your companies should consider when selecting staff to work at the new parent company’s headquarters in Japan.
In the case of recruitment for a work at the headquarters in Japan, some major personal characteristics and capabilities to target should be given consideration (Ting-Toomey and Dorjee, 2018). Cross-cultural communication skills, including active listening, empathy, and adaptation of communication style to various cultural contexts, are critical. Adaptability and flexibility, too, are important, because people will have to become accustomed to a new work situation, new environment, new culture, and new way of living. Genuine interest in Japanese culture, as well as fluency in Japanese language, are strongly advised, as a sign of commitment to acculturating, and to build strong relationships with the local colleagues. Interpersonal skills such as the ability to forge rapport, to maneuver complicated social interactions, and to achieve goals together are of great value in a collectivist country like Japan. Resilience and emotional intelligence play a critical role in the adjustment required for living and working abroad, including culture shock and possible disconnection. Nevertheless, a deep knowledge of the company’s business and strategic objectives is a requirement so that expatriates may seamlessly fit back into the objectives of the parent company.
Question 11 (AC 4.3) Explain which policies and practices your company should adopt for managing the repatriation of expatriate staff after their assignments in the UK and in Japan.
Successful repatriation policies and practices are essential to capitalize on the benefits of assignment abroad and keep a valuable workforce (Mabkhot and Al-Ameryeen, 2023, 209). On returning from postings to either the UK or Japan expatriates should be offered a systematic debriefing experience in which they are able to share their experiences, gain from their experiences and discuss any difficulties they experience during their posting abroad. This is a good engine for knowledge transfer, and enables the company to learn from their own mistakes. Career counselling & reintegration support should be provided to assist repatriates to reintegrate into their native work environment and to select appropriate career choices in their own company. This could include talking1 about new types of roles, responsibilities, or development pathways they can capitalize on by virtue of their global experience. Promoting the learning and the development of its new skills and knowledge acquired by the assignment is a critical factor in motivating the repatriates and to make them feel valued by the organisation. This may include presentations, internal training sessions, or tasks that involve the use of their global experience. Following the return, ongoing communication and support needs to be given to repatriates over the months following their return, in order to facilitate an easy transfer and any kind of residual difficulty.
References
Chang, S.J. and Shim, J., 2015. When does transitioning from family to professional management improve firm performance?. Strategic Management Journal, 36(9), pp.1297-1316.
Elwyn, G., Durand, M.A., Song, J., Aarts, J., Barr, P.J., Berger, Z., Cochran, N., Frosch, D., Galasiński, D., Gulbrandsen, P. and Han, P.K., 2017. A three-talk model for shared decision making: multistage consultation process. bmj, 359.
Gaughan, P.A., 2010. Mergers, acquisitions, and corporate restructurings. John Wiley & Sons.
Hofstede, G., 2011. Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), p.8.
Kang, W.I.K. and Fornes, G., 2017. Where are they going? Case of British and Japanese human resource management. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 11(3), pp.296-322.
Kawanishi, H., 2021. Enterprise unionism in Japan. Routledge.
Knorringa, P., & Nadvi, K. (2016). Rising power clusters and the challenges of local and global standards. Journal of Business Ethics, 133, 55-72.
Mabkhot, H. and Al-Ameryeen, M.F.I., 2023. Bridging Cultures, Building Careers: The Role of Diverse Work Environments in International Assignments. Croatian International Relations Review, 29(93), pp.209-233.
Ono, H., 2018. Why do the Japanese work long hours. Sociological Perspectives on Long Working Hours in Japan, Japan Labor Issues, 2(5).
Sakikawa, T., 2024. The Connections Between National and Organizational Cultures: Evidence from the UK, the US, Saudi Arabia, and Japan (Doctoral dissertation, Chuo University).
Sal, A. and Raja, M., 2016. The impact of training and development on employees performance and productivity. International Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research, 5(7).
Shimizu, T., 2017. Management control systems in Japan. Routledge.
Sparrow, P., Brewster, C. and Chung, C., 2016. Globalizing human resource management. Routledge.
Tahir, R., 2022. Cross-cultural training: a study of European expatriates in New Zealand. European Journal of Training and Development, 46(9), pp.894-919.
Thelisson, A.S., 2023. Coopetition in a merger process: Regulators and management of coopetitive tensions. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 89(2), pp.381-397.
Timsina, S., 2024. Employee Turnover and Engagement Programs for Retention.
Ting-Toomey, S. and Dorjee, T., 2018. Communicating across cultures. Guilford Publications.
Watanabe, S. and Watanabe, S., 2018. Japanese management: Changes and survivals. Japanese Management for a Globalized World: The Strength of the Lean, Trusting and Outward-Looking Firm, pp.15-57.
Wei-Liang, T. and Mei Ling, C., 2018. Seamless HCM Integration: Aligning Tools, Processes, and Cloud Platforms for Maximum Efficiency. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development, 2(4), pp.3068-3081.
