PEOPLE.IDEAS.PERFORMANCE

76 3(56216 25*$1,=$7,216 $1' 62&,(7,(6 7+( ())(&76 2) &2//(&7,9,60 $1' ,1',9,'8$/,60 21 &223(5$7,21 ± $ &203$5,621 2) 520$1,$ $1' 7+( 86$ 0LKDL & %2&$51($ %UXFH ( :,16721 Regent University United States of America ,1752'8&7,21 The purpose of this chapter is to compare the impact of individual/collective culture on group cooperation in the workplace at the person, organization, and societal levels in Romania and the USA. A success factor in cross-cultural management success is for the expatriate manager to understanding the local culture and what is expected of the manager by the employees (Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). Of Hofstede’s six cultural dimensions, individualism/collectivism provides an understanding of how, and why employees cooperate, or don’t cooperate. This chapter helps the expatriate manager from Romania, going to the USA and the USA manager going to Romania, be successful. To do this, we present a definition of cooperation, a definition of individualism/collectivism, how individualism/collectivism relates to cooperation, how the leader is an agent for social change in the organization, ethical leadership models that help the expatriate leader challenge and change the culture in an effort to improve cooperation and firm performance. We conclude with a summary of the key points and action steps for expatriate managers. &223(5$7,21 Smith, Carroll, and Ashford (1995) classified cooperation as informal and formal. Informal cooperation occurs when the group’s values and norms promote, expect, and reward mutual concern and care for the collective group over that of the individual. Behavior occurs, not by written rules and expectations but a cohesive bond among the individuals in a concerted effort to serve the needs of the group. Smith, Carroll, and Ashford posited that informal cooperation was akin to family and clan behaviors. As in a family or clan, the individuals believe that they will interact with each other for a long time and, while individuals can and do leave the collective, the decision to leave is a significant decision with significant impact on the individuals’ future relati onship with the collective. Informal cooperation can be seen at the individual level when two or more individuals decide to function together toward one or more common goals that may benefit the individual, but provide support the collective in the long run. Examples of this occur when a neighbor helps another neighbor to repair a house after storm damage, or provides meals and housekeeping help during times of personal loss, such as in the loss of a loved one, or a sick member of the household. At the indi vidual level the focus of one’s values will be on the other rather than the self, similar to what Buber (2010) presented as ‘I and Thou’. At the organizational level one might see informal cooperation when one of the organizations incurs a disaster of some sort such as a fire or flood. At the societal levels we see this when one country provides financial aid to another country following damage by hurricane, earthquake, etc. While the