Concept of Regionalism
The regionalism as relating to workplace is defined as hostile relations between different employee categories. This is where one group of employees are more close to each other thus encouraging ties among workers from common job groups such as leaders or managers. Moreover, the regions of origin of workers dictate another form of regionalism that exists in workplaces. The China has had a long history of regionalism. For instance, the workers from the same village have strong bonding than those from the same province. Also, migrant workers try to stick together once they arrive. Thus regionalism is a concept which entails creation of an environment where you identify with a particular region or group. Regionalism could work both ways from the junior workers as well as the senior workers (Hsing, 1998).The leader's perception of the minority in workplace is part of the regionalism. In Southern China factories founded by Taiwanese, the official language between managers and workers was Mandarin. However, the managers could speak Hokkian which created a perception that they were unique whenever they did not want the Chinese workers to understand what they were saying (Hsing, 1998). The fact that they could perceive the other minority employees as not of any concern creates the aspect of regionalism.The equality at workplace is also eliminated by regionalism. There was a scenario where a Chinese supervisor knew how to speak the same dialect as managers and as such could appear to enjoy more privilege than other employees. This created lack of equality in workplace as the managers could favor other employees more than others (Hsing, 1998). This creates a bad culture in business and was being practiced in China. Thus regionalism had created a huge inequality in the Chinese businesses and very rarely do the leaders socialize with the minority colleagues.Still on equality, there was high staff turnover and marginalization of Chinese employees. The leaders never minded that former employees would leak the company secrets at all because the Chinese were not allowed to know about any utmost secrets. The situations where the investment in Chinese employees was long term then they would be treated better and trained which could lead to a patronage relationship (Hsing, 1998). Therefore, the employees were never treated equally thus each group was segregated making the whole concept of regionalism to come to existence.The minority in China are expected to behave as required by the management without any questioning. Workers comply with commands without hesitation just as soldiers being given commands from their senior officers. The minority workers were expected to not to raise an issue concerning their day or night shifts, overtime or the length of hours they worked. All of those issues were decided by the management and they were just expected to oblige. There was harsh scolding of minority workers to behave as expected while working. At the extreme cases, there was beating of any disobedient worker who failed to follow the required behavior at work.
In Egypt, the treatment of the minority employees was not different. They were being mistreated by abusive supervisors. They were expected to follow work rules to the latter and failure to do so would mean that their pay could be delayed as a punishment. To worsen the behavior of minority employees, they were expected to take a maximum of five minutes in toilets in which chronographs were installed in the toilet doors for timing. Any delay would mean that a fraction of their pay would be deducted (Beinin & Lockman, 1998). Thus their behavior was dictated purely by the management making it very difficult for the employees.With the improved technology in the China, most of the minority workers lost their jobs. This is because most of their work could now be automated and be controlled by a few supervisors. The problem was that most joint ventures employed temporary or part-time technical employees who formed the minority group of unskilled workers. Therefore with technology improvement, their employee skill structure did not respond due to lack of trainings and as a result they lost their jobs.The technology caused corporate downsizing, company buyouts, reduced wages and the workers were seen as misbehaving (Mulholland, Fassett & Ehrlich, 1996). The effects on reduced wages on the junior workers as the senior workers are being added their salary creates a gap between the leaders and the workers. This is because companies focus on profit increases and cutting costs at the expense of junior workers.The concept of individualism is where people see themselves first as individuals and focus on their own self interest as a matter of priority. On the other hand, collectivism is where priority is given to a group of society or rather a team (DuBrin, 2000). In China the individualism was a leading priority for many industries. They focused more on their returns rather than the welfare of its employees. They were self-centered in their activities and were concerned with their returns in every project (Hook, 1996). There was also individualism in Egypt where the industry owners were concerned on their returns than workers welfare.These concepts influence the behaviors of workers because they tend to be resistant to instructions considering their belief that they are being ignored by their leaders. The characters of these workers are motivated by rebellion to the authority because they would want their grievances to be heard. Thus the regionalism in China and Egypt has impacted negatively on the performance of workers in these regions giving its negative effects on workers.
Leadership Structure to Manage Earthquake Disaster
Want an expert to write a paper for you?
In an area hit by an earthquake, it is important that good leadership coordination is put in place so as to be able to rescue victims as well as reduce the aftermath effects of the disaster. Speed is of the most essence in responding to the disaster of such a magnitude. As a leader of the team consisting of leaders from the China, Japan, Mexico, United States, Canada and Czech Republic, it is of utmost importance that I organize the teams so as to capitalize on their unique leadership styles.Assessment of leaders is of the utmost importance because choosing the best leadership style which can carry out procedures correctly can solve any situation easily. The best leadership team ensures high quality and timely decisions are made (Hellriegel, Jackson & Slocum, 2007). In my consideration while selecting the teams, my target is to achieve those teams that are able to make decisions, solve problems and set various strategies. Moreover, the leaders themselves making a team should be able to have at least a team member capable of directing, consulting, participating negotiating and delegating duties.To begin with United States, their leadership style is that of populist where they have huge following of members. With a United States leader as well as Mexico, it will be easy to get the welfare support from their supporters. In addition, the Americans are charismatic and transformational. A charismatic leader has influence to make the populations to follow what they advice which will be very crucial in the mobilization of relief to the affected members. Moreover, they are participative and always willing to contribute in the debates (Hellriegel et al., 2007). This puts them in important lead positions in a team because they can negotiate, consult and participate.The Japanese are also participatory and values teamwork. They will be able to support their American counterparts in the team. Moreover, the Japan leaders are used to giving donor aid to third developing countries and as such have developed the humanitarian understanding which will be crucial in resource mobilization to assist earthquake victims (Rix, 1993). Thus their support in each team is necessary for its success.On the part of Canadians, they are known to stand great pressure and resist stress. This is an important element in a team because it may reach a time that the rescue mission is stressful and others may give up but Canadians will be in the team to ensure that they press on. The Canadians are known of making difficult decisions, commitments and rallying on their troops to achieve required goals (Dutil, 2008). Thus the motivation to stick to the course will be forthcoming from the Canadians.Moreover, Mexicans are assertive and have long power distance. This is where they respect the leadership of a strong leader and as such will easily fall as members of the team. They are willing followers of leaders and able to do what they recommend with very minimal participation in the decision making process (Chhokar, Brodbeck & House, 2007). Therefore, a Mexican in each team ensures that respect is given to the team leader and that the instructions are clearly executed.The Chinese are not good people when it comes to leadership and they are better led. This is because their leadership styles are traditional paternal leadership which is a basic family leadership. They are not proactive, do not plan a head, do not take responsibility, do not identify their own solutions and ignore problems until it is too late (Zhang & Baker, 2008). Therefore it would be a disaster if I put all Chinese in one group because they may not be of much help to my rescue mission and as such should be allocated to various groups which will guide them in the process.As for the Czech Republic leaders, they are still using old style leadership styles which may not be a good idea for my team. They do not have positive motivation while they value authoritarian style of leadership (Ulrich, 1999). The Czech could be better be in separate teams and not made to be leaders because they may dictate the terms of operations for the entire team. Thus it is crucial that they are subjects so as to be guided while they learn in the process.After analyzing all the above leadership styles of my team members, it would be appropriate that I ensure that each team is blended appropriately. The fact that the team leaders would be a Canadians or Americans will be good for the rescue mission because they have the negotiation skills as well as are participative. They will be able to engage the other teams in programs and ideas as well as spearheading the process of entire rescue operation.More importantly, the Japanese and the Mexicans could be important to be in each group to assist in the direct support to the leaders. This is because they are understanding and have been in situations of helping in giving aid to disaster stricken areas and have the care and understanding.As for the China and Czech, they would be members of my teams but not allowed to take lead positions due to their weak leadership characteristics. They are good in providing support and especially where there are stubborn victims the Czech guys would really dictate terms for them and solve any pending crisis.I do believe that after the setting up of groups as discussed above, my mission would be having an effective leadership capable of helping the area hit by devastating earthquake. The right blending of the teams is a sure success out of diversity.