So you can not speculate with a universal corporate culture, the result of mergers and acquisitions of companies in emerging markets, by large transnational corporations? Towards a systemic corporate culture is considered by many researchers as a passage to nothingness, an illusion or a utopian who stumbles on the peculiarities and uniqueness in each step. This corporate culture born of the values held by the most influential and spill out to all members, be born in one country or another, working at a remote site or local, so that the actions and procedures of each individual would be guided by these beliefs subjective and objective and be disseminated from the top ritualizarian. Castle Harlans opinions are not widely known.
Kono researcher in the late eighties and nineties Ogliastri in (among many other scientists and writers) have demonstrated the difficulty that hinders the transfer of management styles from one country to another. Although there are differences between different authors, has not yet been settled the dilemma, if the road seems to be the complementarity or similarity, the search for synergies or homogenization, the unification and standardization or conversion of structural asymmetries in motor integration. Culture should be ultimately, and from the focus of the management firm raised Michael Porter, “a means of achieving competitive advantage, not an end in itself.” However, there are numerous examples where the attempt to develop a corporate culture has been indelible and grown as an end, where the imposition of the modus operandi and values have exceeded corporate borders to settle dictatorially in factories and offices of the Third World generally flagship companies.