 |
The Source of Status: Achieved or Ascribed
This is the last of the three workplace-related cultural dimensions presented in this chapter: how people come by their status, in their organizations, and in society in general. This concept is related to power distance in some respects and to the individualism/collectivism dichotomy in others. Certain features, however, are outside of those two dimensions and deserve attention in their own right. The two poles here are sometimes referred to as achieved and ascribed, and in other cases, as "doing" cultures and "being" cultures. They are briefly described below.
ACHIEVED STATUS:
In these doing cultures, people are looked up to and respected because of their personal and especially their professional accomplishments. You get ahead into positions of power and influence by virtue of your achievements and performance. Your status is earned and not merely a function of birth, age, or seniority. You are hired based on your record of success, not on the basis of family background, connections, or the school you attended. People aren't particularly impressed with titles. Education is important, but not the mere fact of it; you have to have done something with your knowledge. Status is not automatic and can be forfeited if you stop achieving.
ASCRIBED STATUS: In these being cultures, a certain amount of status is built into the person; it is automatic and therefore difficult to lose. You are looked up to because of the family and social class you are born into, because of your affiliations and membership in certain important groups, and, later, because of your age and seniority. The school you went to and the amount of education you received also confer status, whether or not you did well in school or have done anything with your education. Titles are important and should always be used. You are pressured to justify the power , respect and deference that you automatically enjoy. While you cannot lose your status completely, you can lose respect by not realizing your potential.
| The following incidents have come about in part because of cultural differences involving status; in the space below each description, write what you would do in the particular situation:
|
Upstanding Students
You are a high school teacher in your country. When you enter the classroom, all your students automatically stand up until you give them the signal to sit. You are uncomfortable with this deferential behavior and tell your students they need not stand when you enter the room. After two weeks, the headmaster asks to speak with you. He informs you that the other teachers have heard that your students don't stand when you enter the room and the teachers are upset. They regard this behavior as a sign of disrespect, which they fear may spread to their classrooms. They worry, moreover, that you deliberately may be trying to blur the distinction between teacher and student. If students put themselves on the same level as teachers, chaos will result. What should you do about the teachers' reactions?
Respect
You are an urban planner working for the city government. Every morning a truck bearing city sanitation laborers stops at your house to give you a ride to work. Your boss, an engineer, and a second professional always sit up front in the cab, but you like to sit in the back and banter with the laborers. After a few days, your boss says you are confusing the workers with your informal behavior and warns you that you will soon lose their respect if you don't start acting like a professional.How do you respond?
In the Matter of Mr. Kodo
You're being asked to take sides in a faculty dispute. A few weeks ago a vacancy occurred in the department of the university where you teach. The two candidates for the position, both college graduates, were an older man (Mr. Kodo) who has been at this school for 15 years and a younger man with more up-to-date technical credentials, a superior educational background, and two years of experience on this faculty. From a technical standpoint, the younger man was a much stronger candidate and also a more dynamic teacher, and he was in fact selected for the position by the British expatriate who chairs this department.
|
Mr. Kodo and many of his (and your) colleagues were stunned by the decision, seeing it as a repudiation of his years of experience and dedication to this institution. Mr. Kodo is extremely embarrassed at being passed over and has not appeared on campus since the announcement was made. Now his colleagues are circulating a petition to the chairman to reconsider his decision and put Mr. Kodo into the job he deserves. They have asked you to sign the petition, already signed by all of them as well as scores of students, and to participate actively in this campaign. You in fact feel the right choice was made and are reluctant to get involved, but you are under increasing pressure to "do the right thing."
Considering the Source
You are the technical expert at a provincial agricultural extension office. A delegation from the Minister's office is coming next week to discuss an important change in policy. You are the person who can make a substantive contribution to this discussion, but you are not being invited to the meeting. Instead, your boss has been picking your brain for days and has asked you to write a report for him containing all the important points he should make. Finally, you ask him why he doesn't just bring you along to the meeting and let you speak directly to the delegation. He says you're too young to be taken seriously, and besides, you're a woman. Your arguments are too important, he says, and he doesn't want them to be discounted because of their source. How do you feel, and what's your response?
|
|
|
|
