A COMPARISON AND ANALYSIS OF GERMAN AND UNITED STATES MANAGERIAL ATTITUDES TOWARD THE LEGITIMACY OF ORGANIZATIONAL INFLUENCE i

A major issue facing U.S. corporations in their decisions to purchase established, overseas operations or to engage in multinational joint ventures is the degree to which they can expect to quickly and efficiently exert their influence on the operations of a prospective foreign acquisition or business partner (6, 10). To the extent that they can anticipate agreement on areas of legitimate influence, tension and conflict can be minimized. Mutually accepted and recognized boundaries of legitimate influence also provide a foundation for sound communication and better understanding. It is a well-established fact that different cultures possess differing organizational norms and behavior standards and that they recognize these as legitimate forms of influence (11,15). The present study does not attempt to explain the operation of these norms and behavior standards. Rather, it attempts to note the similarities and dissimilarities of these influences as perceived by two culturally divergent groups and, by inference, to identify, the values and attitudes which guide their actions. Values and attitudes about which there is little mutual agreement often lead to organizational conflict. Such circumstances may even result in the delay or eventual failure of organizational plans. Difficulties in a recent General Motors overseas acquisition attest to such an occurrence (12). This study focuses on the problems of cross-cultural industrial conflict by attempting to identify areas of high and low influence legitimacy in a cross-cultural study of German and United States managers.