“Thumbs‐up is a rude gesture in Australia”: The presentation of culture in international business textbooks

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to consider the role of culture in international business studies, viewed from the perspective of textbooks in the field.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper analyses the separate chapters on the role of culture in 19 survey texts in international business at three levels: factual assertions; social and historical interpretations; and application of general theories.

Findings

Although all textbooks in international business emphasize the importance of culture, the survey reveals serious weaknesses at all three levels, including straightforward errors of fact, more subtle errors of interpretation, and serious problems with definitions and application of theories of cultural difference. The weaknesses are strikingly consistent, and the paper examines a range of possible common causes. Imbricated in the professional structures of the field, the authors appear to be under pressure from publishers, they share a US‐centred bias, and they appear professionally isolated.

Originality/value

Parallel to theories of nationalism and some postcolonial theorists, it can be argued that the implicit purpose of the texts is not to engage sympathetically with actual cultural differences, but rather to mould the next generation of American managers into a common pattern, by identifying an exotic cultural Other against which students will form their new identity. One of the consequences is that it does not matter greatly to the authors whether other cultures are presented accurately, or not. In practical terms, however, cultural differences are important and are recognized as such in international business studies, and so there is reason to hope that the texts will be improved.

Citation

Tipton, F.B. (2008), "“Thumbs‐up is a rude gesture in Australia”: The presentation of culture in international business textbooks", Critical Perspectives on International Business, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/17422040810849730