2.1 Globalization vs. Glocalization

The reference to the term glocalization in chapter 13 is interesting because it contradicts the goals of globalization in many ways.  Globalization is the phenomenon where all the economies of the world become borderless and intralinked.  The ultimate goal of globalization is, of course, the idea of "one economy."  We can see this starting to emerge with the adoption of a single currency in Europe - the Euro, and talks of having the same currency across the U.S., Canada and Mexico.  The idea of "one economy" implies that at some point consumer preferences across the world will start to converge and much of the local preference will be lost.  With integration across country borders, we start to see the Western culture starting to have a significant influence.  I was in India recently after many years and I was shocked to see a Subway!  Complete integration will benefit multinational companies as it eliminates the need to customize products to the local taste and allows for mass production.  So although glocalization is an approach we see many companies employing now, it will inevitably fade away as the economies of the world start to converge into one.

What does this say about communication?  Of course, globalization will never eliminate the need for effective communication nor will it make communication easier.  I think increased globalization only makes the need for communication stronger.  This discussion brings forth an important question - Will English become the "main" language across these economies?  I think that the answer to this is yes but the question is how soon.  The big downside to this is that countries start to lose their individuality.

1.2 Use of Theories as a Manager

I think for a leader or manager theories are an important and useful tool.   As a manager we should use theories as a base and build upon them using our own experiences to create a strategy that will work for us. Of course, there is no "right" way to communicate or handle certain situations in an organization.  It is up to us as the manager to take existing theories for leadership, communication, decision making, organization, etc. and make it our own.  It seems that often managers think that they must use certain strategies to be a good manager; these strategies are often strictly based on theories or what they have seen others do.  What seems to be taken for granted is that each manager must have their own style to be effective. 

A good theory should consist of guidelines and ideas that can be easily interpreted and adapted based on the situation or domain. In this way a theory should be flexible and not rigid.  I also like how the book states that "theories and practice should be in conversation with one another."  I think that this supports the idea that theories should be flexible to allow for adaptation and revision.  A good manager will use a combination of theory, practice and experience to develop a successful leadership strategy that works for them.

1.1 Is an organization similar to a "family"?

Well, I have to say that this first chapter provided a very interesting intro to the course. The use of metaphors to describe organizations is certainly something I can relate to. One metaphor that seems to be misused is when an organization refers to itself a “family”. My boss often refers to our group as a family and I always find myself smirking at this comment. In a way I suppose this metaphor works because organizations are comprised of a group of people that work together towards a similar goal but does this make us a family? In my mind a family is a close-knit group that actually cares about each member and their well-being. Many organizations (including mine) are so full of controversy, politics, competition, etc. that it seems silly to use the word “family’ to describe them. It’s a nice thought though and I wonder how many organizations have been able to achieve creating an environment that feels like a family...