Page 75 - Crossing Cultural Boundaries - Cees den Teuling

requirements for achieving success in the 21st century”. They suggest that from the long-term perspective firms that learn how to manifest both reactive and entrepreneurial behavioural patterns will become the top competitors in the domains of their operations. Their research suggests that the combined manifestation of behavioural patterns is not environmentally determined. Rather, it is determined by the existence of deep organisational capacities that enable firms to react and pro-act as necessary. In short, the path to the sustained competiveness seems to start within the firm. Combined organisational structure and a style of decision-making is probably a driver for a fast sense, process and action by the introduction of newly or currently acquired business information.
Since the focus of this research is directed to trans-boundary, intercultural transfer of managerial knowledge and skills towards and from organisations in the Russian Federation, a severe “translation” of Western business concepts is required. As proposed by many studies, “imitation is a process” to copy the “original” (Green, 2014). In case of current study, it would have been copying the Western model of business and entrepreneurship. To be able to operate in the Russian Federation as any consultant, advisor, trainer and/or educator, the global, western business concepts will need a “translation” into the risky business environment that includes a higher vulnerability to corruption, extortion, and violation of contracts, weak institutions and legal system (Manolova, Eunni & Gyoshev, 2008). Hofstede’s Low trust dimension reflects the reality of the Russian society, which has an enormous impact on the “ease” of doing business as shown in the “Corruption Perception Index 2016” of “Transparency International”, measuring and ranking Russia at place 131 of the 176 countries reviewed (Transparency International, 2016). Local organisations in Russia have a larger chance to be subject to bribery, extortion and corruption, predominantly by the organised crime and representatives of state and semi-state institutions.
The cost of corruption in Russia is estimated approximately 15% of GDP, compared by the less than 1% for the 28 member states of the European Uinion, in total (Orttung, R., 2014, p. 4). A research by INDEM (Information Science for Democraty Foundation, (Rimskii, 2013, p.78) stated that “the Russian population is tolerant to corruption and often fears that the cost of fighting it will be higher than the corruption itself”. Based on the preliminary outcomes of the INDEM research, Rimskii (2013, p. 75) argued about corruption as a “social norm by which Russian citizens solve their problems with government officials. Nevertheless, having to pay bribes does not mean that the Russians support the system”. Major consequences are in suppressing the health
73