Brazil MNC'Sdraft Final

8/3/2019 Brazil MNC'Sdraft Final

1/32

Between Unity and Diversity:

Historical and Cultural

Foundations of Brazilian

Management

Insper Working PaperWPE: 218/2010

Gazi Islam


2/32

Copyright Insper. Todos os direitos reservados.

proibida a reproduo parcial ou integral do contedo destedocumento por qualquer meio de distribuio, digital ou im-

presso, sem a expressa autorizao doInsper ou de seu autor.

A reproduo para fins didticos permitida observando-seacitao completa do documento


3/32


4/32

Cultural Foundations of Brazilian Management 2

Between Unity and Diversity: Historical and Cultural Foundations of Brazilian Management

Introduction

Over the past two decades, Brazil has increasingly established itself as one of the

worlds foremost emerging economies. As the 8th

largest economy in the world and largest in

South America (World Bank, 2009), Brazil is among the worlds leading producers of key

commodities, as well as a pioneer in areas such as ethanol production and genetically

modified crops. As one of the members of the BRICs group of emerging economies (ONeil,

2001), Brazil is poised to become a major player in the 21st

century. As a home country of

multinational corporations (MNCs), internationally recognized companies such as Embraer,

JBS-Friboi and AmBev are among the dominant forces in their respective markets.

Despite the growing importance of Brazil as an economic power, very little work has

been internationally published, in comparison with other BRIC countries, with regards to the

dynamics of Brazilian management practices (e.g. Mesquita, 2008). Extant literature tends to

focus on specific sectors, (e.g. Mesquita, Lazzarini & Cronin, 2007), and while large scale

international studies, such as Hofstede (1980) and the GLOBE project (House, Hanges,

Javidan, Dorfman & Gupta, 2004) have included Brazil, their generality has precluded an in-

depth assessment of the unique contextual factors that contribute to the formulation of

contemporary Brazilian managerial perspectives.

At the same time, a wealth of literature in the social sciences has studied the particular

mix of historical, cultural, ethnic and political factors that constitute the Brazilian way of life

(e.g. Holanda, 1996; Da Matta, 1991). Although some of this work has been integrated into

the management literature (e.g. Amado & Brasil, 1991; Duarte, 2006), very little integration

has been done to draw out the managerial implications of the Brazilian social, cultural and

historical context. Understanding these implications becomes increasingly important with the


5/32


growing integration of Brazil within the world economy, both in terms of foreign investments

in Brazil, and in terms of the growing presence of Brazilian companies abroad.

The aim of the current chapter is to give an overview of Brazilian managerial

tendencies in light of the countrys unique historical and cultural roots. I will argue that

Brazilian MNCs inherit many of their predominant tendencies from organizational aspects of

Brazilian bureaucratic structures, structures which developed early in Brazils colonization by

the Portuguese, then were refined and changed through independence, republicanism, crisis

and democratic renewal. Rather than rely on typological categorizations based on cross-

cultural taxonomies (e.g. Hofstede, 1980), I will attempt to trace the macro-level

circumstances in which the current management of Brazilian MNCs evolved.

The argument of the paper begins with a brief overview of the historical legacy of

Brazilian trade with the exterior. Beginning with the early colonial period, Brazilian trade

was marked by heterogeneous interests, and organizations functioned in the midst of great

ethnic, geographical, and linguistic diversity (e.g. Alcaldipani & Crubellate, 2003). Inheriting

a highly formalized regulatory system from the Portuguese (Amado & Brazil, 1991) and a

dazzling diversity of local constituencies owing to the geographical size and demographic

diversity of the country, this heterogeneity continued after independence, in the Imperial and

Republican epochs. Throughout the twentieth century, Brazil has vacillated from attempts to

centralize decision making and consolidate the regulatory environment of the country, and to

take advantage of the creative possibilities inherent in its variegated climate and culture (e.g.

Martins, 2000). Key cultural practices well documented in Brazilian managerial styles, such

as the jeitinho or little way (Barbosa, 1992), the gambiarra, or creative fix (e.g. Amado &

Brasil, 1991) or the style of the homem cordial or cordial man (Holanda, 1996), are then

explained as ways of negotiating these dual tendencies of formality and diversity. It is argued

that such developments lead to a seemingly paradoxical Brazilian managerial style marked by


6/32


both a high deference to formal authority, and a tendency to creative improvisation and

innovation, a combination counter-intuitive to traditional managerial theories.

Finally, it is argued that this combination has allowed Brazilian MNCs to adopt

Western or Northern managerial practices without losing a sense of their own

authenticity, because of the self-consciously appropriative and recombinative nature of the

Brazilian tradition. This insight concludes the chapter by suggesting how the Brazilian

example provides an interesting angle to the local-global debates prevalent in the

globalization literature (e.g. Kearney, 1995). As a local culture that has from its inception

reconfigured externally originating political and social practices, Brazils most unique cultural

expressions are also its most borrowed. In a world marked by increasing cross-border

interaction, such a model of cultural practices is both theoretically and practically useful.

Exploring Brazilian Management

As a preliminary note, we may observe that within the global business administration

literature, analyses of Brazilian managerial styles are quite rare (e.g. Mesquita, 2008),

although Brazil has made important strides on the world stage (WorldBank, 2009; The

Economist, 2009). The work that does exist often relies on etic, general categorical schemes

such as Hofstedes dimensions (e.g. OKeefe & OKeefe, 2004), or uses Brazilian businesses

as samples for generalizable propositions, rather than examining the particularistic

characteristics of Brazilian firms (e.g. Mesquita, Lazzarini & Cronin, 2007). Similarly,

economically oriented work tends to use econometric indicators, rather than examining the

cultural, historical and symbolic aspects of Brazilian society (e.g. Griesse, 2007). Some

important exceptions involve Duartes (2006) work on the Brazilian jeitinho, and

Lemartowics & Roths (2001) work on Brazilian subcultures. Thus, it is argued, while such

studies have included Brazilian data, they have underplayed the historical specificity of the

Brazilian environment, and have missed opportunities to draw important lessons from this


7/32


increasingly important but neglected site. In particular, Brazil can offer lessons along two key

dimensions that have been of interest to culture researchers, the homogeneity-heterogeneity

axis and the global-local axis.

Heterogeneity or Unity?

As Brazilianists have long pointed out (e.g. Ribero, 1995, Da Matta,1984; 1995), the

particularity of Brazil does not reside in a historically homogeneous and deep-rooted essence

of the Brazilian people, but precisely in the lack of such a homogeneous essence (e.g.

DaMatta, 1995). The Brazilian population emerged out of a complex miscegenation of

Portuguese, African, and Indigenous populations at its inception (Ribeiro, 1995). Later,

waves of German, Italian, and Japanese immigration added further cultural complexity to the

Brazilian social environment (Meade, 2004).

Overlaid upon the ethnic diversity of the country are geographic and economic

variations that exacerbate differences and proliferate diversity in styles of living and working.

As the fifth largest country in the world (Meade, 2004), the continental proportions of the

country also contain a large diversity of climactic and geographical differences, from the

desertified Serto region, to the dense Amazonian forest, to the swampy Pantanal region.

Economic differences between these regions are extreme, with the majority of economic

wealth concentrated in the industrial south (Angell, 2008). In fact, although recent years have

seen an increased focus on addressing inequality (e.g. Bianchi & Braga, 2005), Brazil still

displays one of the highest economic inequalities in the world. Gini indicators, which measure

wealth concentration (on a scale of 0-1, with 1 being total concentration of wealth) reached

values over .60 in th 1990s, and are consistently over .50 (World Bank, 2008).

Given this geographic, cultural, racial and economic diversity, making sense of

Brazilian managerial behavior is inherently challenging. Some existing work, for example,

has shown significant regional differences in work values across regions in Brazil


8/32


(Lenartowics & Roth 2001). Lenartowics & Roth found significant differences in work

related values such as risk aversion and the importance for achievement across regions in the

south of Brazil (comparing Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo, and Minas Gerais regions). Such

differences influenced performance across regions, even though the entire sample was from

the south of the country. A complete representation including Northern and North-Eastern

regions would surely further increase observed regional differences.

On the other hand, despite this diversity, many aspects of Brazil seem surprisingly

unified. For example, compared to countries with high demographic diversity (e.g. India), the

linguistic homogeneity of Brazil is notable. In addition, despite its relatively greater levels of

social inequality and crime in comparison with its neighbors, there has been relatively little

social unrest or political revolution in Brazil (Gouveia, Albuquerque, Clemente & Espinoza,

2002). Many of the essential feature of Brazilian society remain rooted in its early

institutions, and one of the countries aporias is how it has remained so socially constant in

the face of so many social ills. In the words of DaMatta:

What is startling in the Brazilian case is not the existence of contradictions and

cynicism, but the enormous tolerance of the system. To understand this

tolerance would create the capacity to break through the duality and its web of

compensations (DaMatta, 2005, p 276)

Indeed, some have argued that many daily Brazilian rituals are aimed at smoothing social

relations at the interpersonal level, while reinforcing hierarchical systems at the social level

(e.g. Barbosa, 1992; Hess, 1995). Thus while superficial accounts of Brazil might view it

though the Carnaval lens of anything goes, the ritual enactment of diversity and difference

may mask deeper cultural currents that remain stable (DaMatta, 1995).

Many authors have similarly argued that underneath its apparent diversity, Brazil does

have a unified culture, although such unity might be difficult to pick up at the level of cultural


9/32


traits or characteristics. For example, DaMatta (1995) argues that Brazilian (and other Latin

American) cultures are more characterized by relational ties rather than constituent

characteristics, such that rather than study Brazilian culture though values, it should be

studied at the level of the encounter. This difference, according to the analysis, emerges

from the fact that Brazilian culture does not imagine itself as a people with a single essence,

but as the outcome of an encounter between civilizations, and thus emphasize flexibility

with regards to the other, rather than the expression of internal personal characteristics.

It may not be necessary to go beyond trait descriptions to find some level of unity in

Brazilian culture however; even at the level of traits, tendencies exist at the national level

(House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman and Gupta, 2004, Hofstede 1980). Although the

Lenartowics & Roth (2001) study focused on regional differences, it also noted that such

within group differences do not exclude national traits, but rather complement them. Okeefe

& Okeefe (2004), in addition, used national-level indicators (Hofstedes (1980) dimensions)

to compare Brazilian managers with their U.S. counterparts In this comparison, Brazil was

relatively collectivistic, with high power distance compared to the U.S. Brazilian managers,

relatively lower levels of trait masculinity, and high uncertainty avoidance. Such trait

descriptions seem to fall in line with Hofestedes (1980) own findings and are consistent with

more recent descriptions from the GLOBE leadership study (House et al, 2004).

Although such trait descriptions do not give a thick view of culture (Geertz 1973),

they do tend to corroborate, or at least are coherent with, qualitative descriptions of Brazilian

culture such as those of DaMatta (e.g. 1984), Barbosa (1992), or others. For example, the

coexistence of a highly bureaucratized formal sector, marked by rigid authority relations and a

highly personalistic informal sector, meant to smooth over interpersonal conflict, do seem

consistent with a country scoring high on Hofstedes dimensions of power distance and

femininity. Thus both quantitative, trait-based methods and qualitative methods seem to be


10/32


indicating some regular tendencies among Brazilian managers underlying the seeming

heterogeneity of the culture.

Local or Global?

A second important dimension to consider when examining Brazilian managerial

behavior is the global context in which such behavior is acquired and tested. Just as it cannot

be assumed that managerial behavior within one Brazilian locale can be generalized to the

country as a whole, it would also be myopic to attribute managerial behavior to a specifically

Brazilian culture independent of the global context of managerial norms and education. As in

many Latin American countries (e.g. Ibarra-Colado, 2006), managerial expertise often draws

on U.S. or European business norms as benchmarks, adopting managerial practices from the

North which may or may not align with the home culture. In the Brazilian case, many

scholars have noted the heavy borrowing of Northern managerial techniques as models in

their own productive endeavors (Caldas & Wood, 1997; Wood & Caldas, 2002; 1998). In

addition, Brazilian business education originated in, and has remained, heavily tied to

Northern models, with the public education system drawn from European influences, and

private education linked directly to U.S. support and investment (e.g. Fischer, 1984).

Textbooks are often translations of texts used in the U.S., and are often distributed through

international subsidiaries of U.S. publishing houses. Although a thriving Brazilian business

literature exists, its methods and theory are often drawn from Northern models (e.g. Carrieri

& Rodrigues, 2001). In this context, it would be difficult to directly draw consequences about

national culture from observing managerial knowledge and practices, since such knowledge

and practices are often the result of complex negotiations between cultures, and

appropriations of foreign practices, rather than simple expressions of the home culture.

At the same time, some have noted that the spread of originally Northern social

and cultural institutions is not a process of homogenous adoption, but rather an adaptation of


11/32


those very institutions to fit with pre-existing local ways of life (Sahlins, 1994). In this view,

cultures select and reject elements of managerial practices based on the extent to which such

practices can be made intelligible to local actors, and can be used to reinforce pre-existing

power relations. As mixture occurs, new forms of intelligibility and new power relations may

arise, demonstrating not conformity to foreign influences, but expressing hybrid cultures that

are marked by unpredictable remixes of local and foreign features (e.g. Chu & Wood, 2008)

Such an insight is relevant to the styles of capitalism literature (e.g. Dunphy, 1987;

Hall & Soskice, 2001), which argues that countries within the global economy adapt culture-

specific ways of adapting to markets, and that local cultures resist homogenization and by

their creative adaptation of capitalist institutions, they put a local stamp on these institutions

(Hall & Soskice, 2001). Thus, rather than studying how emerging nations are similar or

different from the traditionally studied business cultures of the U.S. and Europe, scholars

should focus on the unique ways in which those nations creatively appropriate and modify

those cultures in a local context.

In the Brazilian case, such an examination of creative appropriation is particularly

interesting, because as discussed above, notions of encounter and mixture are central to

the Brazilian ethos (DaMatta, 1995). As Mignolo (2001) observes with regards to Latin

American nations, the role of European culture was more radically constitutive of national

identity than it was in other regions of the world. This point is particularly true for Brazil,

whose indigenous peoples (as opposed to Mexico, Bolivia, or Peru, for example) were less

organized in terms of imperial structures than in other regions of the continent, and which was

itself for a short time the seat of the Portuguese empire. The current borders in Latin America

were almost entirely dependent on the Iberian administrative structure, and thus the reigning

forms of governance became strongly imprinted on Latin American nations. As in other Latin


12/32


American countries, the European cultural matrix also became a strong locus for Brazilian

self-identity, and remains so to this day (e.g. Ribeiro, 1995).

In this context, it makes little sense to ask whether Brazilian borrowings of foreign

managerial practices are authentic representations of Brazilian culture, when Brazilian

culture is fundamentally based on notions of mixture and borrowing. Indeed, the perspective

of DaMatta described above seem to imply that the very notion of an authentic essence goes

against the grain of Brazilian self-perceptions, which focus on encounter and negotiation

between ways of life. Along this line, it is important to note Wood and Caldas (2000)

warning not to read foreign borrowings at face value. According to them, such borrowings

take on different meanings when they are implemented in Brazilian firms, and take on

different social functions in Brazil than they would in their countries of origin. For example,

Caldas and Wood (1997) point out instances where managerial practices are adopted for their

symbolic rather than their instrumental value. Such practices, such as ISO certifications or

other best practices, may be adopted for the English to see, to use a popular Brazilan

saying. That is, the adoption of foreign practices confers institutional legitimacy to managers

who use them, and gives the impression that the firm is up to date with the state of the art in

global industry.

Summary

Having summarized briefly two important general topic dimensions in which the

Brazilian case can prove illuminating, it remains to specify the micro-level practices in which

these aspects of Brazilian culture are instantiated within the world of work. As Amado &

Brasil (1991) point out, such practices can serve as hermeneutic keys which reflect deeper

truths about the social organization of the workplace. Following their approach, to unlock

the social significance of such behaviors, we must first understand the historical background


13/32


against which they develop, in order to see how specific practices arose as adaptations to the

formal and informal structures within Brazil. It is to this background that I now turn.

Brazilian Management in Historical Perspective

Many theorists have noted that individuals act largely based on internalized schema

that, upon analysis, reveal underlying social and historical structures, although the existence

of these structures may not be overly represented in the actors consciousness (e.g. Schein,

1980; Dimaggio, 1997). Lubatkin, Lane, Collin & Very (2005), for example, analyze

corporate governance behaviors as rooted in the institutional development of a country, and

use such historical differences to explain cross-cultural variation between the U.S., France,

and Sweeden. Such historical-institutional differences, which Lubatkin et al. term level 1

institutions, do not negate the importance of different value systems and cultural attitudes (as,

for example, in Hofstede (1980), or the Globe Project (House et al, 2004), but rather

complement such approaches by treating value differences as symptoms of systemic

differences in historical-institutional frameworks across countries (see also North, 1990).

Following this approach, I will attempt to explore aspects of the level 1 context in Brazil

that may shed light on the ways in which Brazilian managers deal with challenges in the

workplace.

First, it is important to note the importance of the colonial legacy among thinkers of

Brazilian national and organizational culture (Ribeiro, 1995; Freitas, 1997; Amado & Brasil,

1991). Specifically, the fact ofPortuguese colonialism, as opposed to British or French,

weighs heavily on these analyses (Freitas, 1997). As a coastal country on the periphery of

Europe, subjected itself to centuries of Moorish occupation, Portugal already represented a

complex mix of different cultures, particularly those of Africa, an aspect which some see as

important for establishing its colonial tendencies toward mixture and the subsequent Brazilian


14/32


eschewal of essential, intrinsic, or racial identities (Freire, 1966; Freitas, 1997; Amado &

Brasil, 1991).

Institutionally, Portugal was faced with the dilemma of being a small and distant

country attempting to control a large expanse of territory with a small colonial population. It

managed this difficulty by dividing up and allocating vast territories to donatorios, or land

holders (Meade, 2004), whose holdings gave them interests in managing and controlling the

territory. This privileged group of colonial landholders was referred to as the estamento, a

term of social segmentation that sits somewhere between notions of class, caste, and

bureaucracy (Faoro, 1958). Estamentos differ from castes because they are not couched

within religious or cosmological conceptions; in fact, many of the early Brazilian landholders

were openly opposed by the Church (Meade, 2004). The concept differs from class, in that it

is not purely an economic stratification, but is based on the political establishment of social

hierarchies (Faoro, 1958; Amado & Brasil, 1991). Although political, however, estamentos

differ from bureaucracies in that they were not based in a rationalistic concept of legitimate

authority (e.g. Weber, 1958), but rather on the discretion of the Portuguese court. Rather than

being founded on universalistic conceptions of citizenship, these structures resisted the

consolidation of citizenship within the territory (Carvalho, 1987), and threatened to import a

type of colonial order that resembled European feudalism (Meade, 2004).

The imposition of a strict legal order on the colony, coupled with the effective

difficulty in enforcing such an order, led to an interesting situation whereby actors searched

for creative ways of subtly subverting formal structures (Ramos, 1983; Rosenn, 1971).

According to some (e.g. Amado & Brazil, 1991), Brazilian administrative behavior owes

many of its current aspects to this behavioral adaptation. Secondary mediators arose in order

to bridge the immense gap between law and civil society, leading to a flexible view of social


15/32


regulations based on personalistic relationships and case by case exigencies. In the words of

Campos (1966, P 29, in Amado & Brasil, 1991) such mediators:

..patch up the gap between the law and the fact, making possible the

impossible, legal the illegal, and fair the unfair. They grant flexibility to a

formal and rigid law with excessive logical strictures.

Thus, rather than taking an overly legalistic view of such flexible arrangements as elements of

corruption, once seen in their socio-historical context, they come to appear as ways to make

possible an unworkable system. That such opportunities to use flexibility benefit the

powerful and those with dense social connections goes without saying, but such spaces also

may provide a buffer between formal structures created undemocratically, and the people who

would be otherwise be subject to such structures (e.g. Barbosa, 1992; Duarte, 2006). Such

adaptive behaviors also may explain the common finding that Brazilians tend to place high

importance on social relationshipa and personalistic ties (e.g. Prates & Barros, 1997: Bertero,

1980).

The circumstances surrounding the unique passage of Brazil from colony to

independent state, rather than overturning these older aspects of the society, worked to

consolidate them in a new national aristocracy. Threatened by the Napoleonic conquests of

the early 19th

century, the Portuguese royal family moved the governmental administration to

Rio de Janeiro, effectively transforming Brazil into the seat of the Portuguese empire. Upon

its return to Portugal, the Portuguese king, Joao VI, urged his son, Don Pedro, to return to

Portugal, but the latter refused, declaring himself emperor of the new Brazilian state.

Although this act was disobedient, it had none of the republican fervor and revolutionary

violence of the Bolivarian movment that liberated the rest of South America. Brazil would

not become a republic until the end of the century, and the new ruler was the son the

Portuguese king. Under these conditions, the prevailing social structure was under little


16/32


pressure to democratize. In fact, the most fervent opponents of the move were the native

merchants who saw, under the new empire, the ascendance of the Portuguese born aristocracy

to top administrative postions in the new state (Meade, 2004). Effectively, the new state had

internalized the colonial administrative structure and heavily top down and authoritarian

system, a structure which many Brazilian administrators have seen in national business

organizations (e.g. Spink, 1997).

Over the 19th

centry, Brazil maintained a dependent role on outside merchants, in

particular the British, to market its growing commodity exports, first cotton, then later, coffee

(Lobo 1978). Over half the Brazilian coffee trade at one point was controlled by British

intermediaries, who then pushed for their increased role in the development of internal

infrastructure products over local competitors, thus inhibiting a locally emergent capitalist

class (Albert, 1988). Thus early industrial developments in Brazil were already subject to

exposure to British ideas about economic organization and trade, with elite Brazilians acting

as intermediaries. According to some scholars (e.g. Caldas, 1997), 19th

century Brazilian

culture was heavily influenced by British social and industrial norms. The Brazilian

ambivalence with regards to the local versus global roots of managerial practice should be

seen in the light of this intermediary role at the inception of Brazilian industrialization.

It may be noted that the earlier point made about the imposition of imperial

administrative structures on a diverse population speaks to the first conceptual axis mentioned

above, that of unity versus plurality. The breach between coexisting formal and informal

ways of life may be seen as an attempt to preserve diversity in the face of a formal system that

stressed absolute authority. The latter point, however, regarding industrialization via internal

versus external sources speaks to the local versus global dimension regarding the sources of

managerial practices. Both of these dimensions become central to understanding these

practices as they developed in the Republican era of Brazil around the turn of the 20th

century.


17/32


The initial Brazilian Republic was formed in 1889 not from a democratic uprising, but

from a military takeover. However, discontent with rule from a distant capital and the need to

take into account diverse stakeholders led to a constitution which was essentially a

compromise between authoritarian and liberal views (Meade, 2004). However, because of

restrictive policies such as literacy tests, only a small minority of citizens were able to

realistically participate in the formal public sphere (Bethell, 2000). Thus, the stark distinction

between private and public spheres continued. Rather than a slow but progressive move

toward democratization, throughout the 20th

century, Brazil cycled in between more

democratic and more authoritarian regimes (e.g. Segrillo, 2005).

This period was marked by an ideological quandary as to the development of a

national identity. Some scholars have described Brazil as having muddled references

(Martins, 2000); while intellectuals and leaders searched for distinctive essential features of

the Brazilian people, the very notion of essentialism and nation that underlay this search

was imported from nationalistic philosophies imported from abroad (Martins, 2000). In a

telling example, the modernist anthropophagic movement of the 1920s (Andrade, 1990

1972) rejected European rationalism and civilization in favor of a sensual, tropical conception

of Brazil emphasizing its African and Indigenous roots; yet works of this period were heavily

influenced by French surrealism, psychoanalysis, and other European ideas (Rolnick, 1998).

More recently, Brazilian organizational scholars have applied this idea to organizations,

positing anthropophagic organization as a characteristic of Brazilian firms which both draw

on foreign know-how and reconfigure and remix this know-how in unexpected ways unique

to the local setting (Wood & Caldas, 2002; 1998).

This sketch of the Brazilian historical backdrop, although very brief, can allow us to

make sense of certain behaviors typical in contemporary organizational life. To summarize,

key themes include the wide space between formal and informal social structures, the struggle


18/32


to survive within a dense and unresponsive bureaucracy though personal ties, the preservation

of social hierarchy alongside the cyclical attempts at democratization and participation, and

the ambivalent views of foreign influences vis a vis national culture. We now turn to how

these themes become represented in cultural tendencies, values and practices in Brazil.

Unpacking Some Aspects of Managerial Practice

The Individual and the Person

As described above, the wide gap between formal and informal systems in Brazil

created practical difficulties for administrators. In his institutional analysis of Brazil, Rosenn

(1971) wondered how the administrative bureaucracy, with its top-heavy regulations,

managed to function at all. This practical difficulty gave rise to adaptive behaviors on the

part of social actors. Perhaps the most well known analysis of how these structures became

internalized in the minds of social actors was given by DaMatta (1991), in his distinction

between the individual and theperson in Brazilian culture. Individuality, according to

DaMatta, refers to the formal conception of the person under the law. Individuals are equal

and anonymous under the law, and are regulated by bureaucratic rules. Personhood, on the

other hand, refers to the socially embedded actor, with a unique personality, necessities, and

set of social relationships. The formal-informal gap becomes subjectively experienced as a

gap between individuality and personhood.

In a well-known example, DaMatta (1991) describes a common encounter between a

traffic policeman, representing the universality of the legal code, and a driver who is caught

breaking the law. When asked for his papers, the driver responds do you know who you are

talking to? Rather than simple deviance, this response transfers the driver from the domain

of generalized legal subjectivity to the domain of personhood, complicating the application of

the law by the threat of informal personalistic repercussions for the policeman. The


19/32


credibility of this threat can short-circuit the application of rules, and the driver remains free

as a person, not being caught up into the realm of individual.

This analysis is important when placed against the context of U.S. legal perspectives,

in which rules are often viewed as guarantors of individual rights (e.g. Primus, 1999). Rather

than an ideal to be reached, DaMatta describes individuality as a state of anonymity and

danger to be avoided. In this context, actors will be more likely to use bureaucratic rules to

block, rather than enable, action (for a discussion of coercive versus enabling functions of

rules, see Adler & Borys, 1996).

This inversion of the functions of institutionalization can have paradoxical

consequences. Following Prates & Barros (1997), resolving organizational problems such as

corruption by tightening regulation can paradoxically augment the tendency toward

informality, where actors rely more heavily on social relations in the face of an unrelenting

administration. Alternatively, de-institutionalization can paradoxically erode social bonds

formed in response to formal rules. In a striking historical case, Joaquim Nabuco, one of the

key proponents for the abolition of slavery in Brazil, once wrote that his missed the former

slaves (Nabuco, 1949, p 231). Clearly, he was not referring to the institution of slavery, but

of the personal patrocinial and affective bonds between slave and master than had become

replaced by formalistic ties characterizing industrial free labor. As Holanda (1996) describes,

these informal ties become embodied in the figure of the homem cordial, or cordial man, a

gentle and accommodating yet paternalistic figure who at once is a social enabler and

defender of hierarchy.

While deeply rooted in the agrarian historical foundations of Brazil, some

organizational scholars of Brazil (e.g. Duarte, 2006; Freitas 1997) argue that this mix of

formal regulation and informal social enabling remains central in contemporary Brazilian

organizations. Freitas (1997) suggests that in many ways, the contemporary organizational


20/32


boss reenacts the role of the master of the manor, trading personal loyalty for extra-

bureaucratic favors. Thus Brazilian organizations may be considered to embody a double

system, whereby interpersonal outcomes may differ greatly depending on the register in

which they are being enacted.

Rituals of Inversion and Impermanence

An intuitive difficulty in such a double system is how to transition back and forth

between formal and informal levels within the administrative system. Where symbolic

organizational transitions are common, organizations tend to mark such transitions though

ritual, ceremony, or other cultural forms (e.g. Trice & Beyer, 1984). Accordingly, DaMatta

(1995) specifies three central types of ritual in Brazil: Civic rites, that reinforce and legitimate

status quo formal structures, other worldly rituals that transcend and give respite from daily

social struggles, and rituals of inversion, such as Carnival, which allow informal norms and

personal desires to be enacted temporarily on the public stage in order to let off steam and

prevent social fragmentation.

With regards to navigating between the formal and informal, rituals of inversion can

shed some light on how such navigations are achieved. These rituals, while inverting

organizational norms, must not overtly challenge the social structure, remaining transitory and

exceptional.

Perhaps the most famous of these rituals is the common quotidian ritual of the

jeitinho, or little way (e.g. Barbosa, 1992; Duarte, 2006). Duarte (2006), surveying the

various treatments of the jeitinho, finds it diversely described as a para-legal institution

(Campos, 1966), an institutional by-pass (Rosenn, 1971), a way of being (Torres, 1973),

a source of empowerment (Abreu, Costa & Barbosa, 1982) and a form of social navigation

(DaMatta, 1984). Consistent with all of these conceptions, my characterization of the jeitinho


21/32


as a ritual of inversion highlights its role in switching back and forth from individualistic to

personalistic social spheres.

The jetinho is essentially the use of personalistic ties to temporarily bypass formal

rules, for example, by giving informal IOUs when funds are unavailable or by moving to the

front of the line because of personal connections, for example. It is based on personal

niceness or simpatia (Barbosa, 1991), because people know that formal systems often produce

inefficient results and are prepared to make exceptions, leading to a cordial and informal

social style (Holanda, 1996). In addition, offering someone a jeitinho may be part of a

generalized exchange mechanism, whereby one would expect that, when the need arises,

members of the community would be willing to bend the rules for ones own sake (Barbosa,

1992; Duarte, 2006). Thus, the administrative order is temporarily inverted in order to

consolidate the interpersonal order.

Key to the functioning of this inversion is the diminuitive inho part of the jeitinho.

The favor is to be small, subtle, and temporary, and should not overtly criticize the formal

order, but rather, by promoting harmony at the interpersonal and functional level, actually

reinforces the hierarchical order by diffusing social discontent (Barbosa, 1995). The jeitinho

presupposes a static and unchangeable order; otherwise, why not try to change the rules? The

personalistic space consolidates the formal, and vice versa.

A second behavioral artifact is the gambiarra, or quick improvisational fix, which has

received less scholarly attention than the jeitinho but is similar in its origins and aspects

(Bonfleur, 2006). Examples of gambiarras at work would be gluing together a worn out piece

of equipment rather than ordering a new one, or scribbling a name on a guest list rather than

typing it in the system. The gambiarra represents flexibility and improvisation, but also a

hesitation to work within the established rules. Gambiarras are generally meant to be

tentative, make-do solutions until future formal solutions are found, although it may be


22/32


questionable to what extent these future solutions actually occur (Amado & Brasil, 1991).

Interestingly, while in Brazil gambiarra refers to an improvised solution, in Portugal the term

refers to a light extension, used to illuminate hidden areas. The parallel will not be elaborated

here, but is worth contemplating.

Both the jeitinho and the gambiarra have in common the transitory and short-term

nature of their application; although often repeated, they are not meant to promote long term

change but occur in the immediate time perspective horizon. This aspect fits nicely with the

small existing empirical literature on time perception in Brazil. For example, Levine, West &

Reis (1980) found that, compared with the U.S., Brazilian tended to have more flexible

definitions of timeliness, reported time in more general terms (e.g. five oclock versus two

minutes past five), were less likely to attribute lateness to personal failure, and were less

likely to hold negative judgments of people who arrive late to appointments. On a more

theoretical level, DaMatta (in Amado & Brasil, 1991) posits that the individual-person

distinction translates into a time division among Brazilians, whereby formal time, like that of

the U.S., is linear and progressive, whereas personal time or time at home is cyclical; at work,

Brazilians tend to vacillate between the two forms of time through daily rituals such as coffee

breaks (cafezinhos, note again the inho), an important part of organizational life (Amado &

Brasil, 1991).

The National and the Foreign

As mentioned above, the figure of the foreign has played an important role in the

construction of a Brazilian self-image (e.g. Caldas, 1997; Motta, Alcadipani & Bresler, 2001).

In many ways, the distinction national-foreign may be overlaid upon the informal-formal

dimension, since many of the formal structures used in contemporary organizations are

foreign in origin (Caldas, 1997; Caldas & Wood, 2002). Rather than simply originating

abroad, some have argued that these systems helped to construct an image of Brazil that was


23/32


outside of its reality, and that everyday actors struggled to conform to (Caldas, 1997; Motta et

al, 2001), further distancing the formal from the informal.

The sense of the superiority of the foreign was reinforced through the educational system

(Fischer, 1984), and the national academic production (Sento-se, 2005). According to Sento-

se, a driving question in the Brazilian social sciences has been What do we lack to become

modern (Sento-se, 2005, p 16). Studies on the lack of education (the first universities in

Brazil emerged much later than in the rest of the continent) reinforced this tendency. Many

corporations send expatriates abroad in order to be socialized in business norms from the U.S.

and Europe, as a condition for success in Brazil (Caldas & Wood, 1997). More recently,

Brazilian elites have viewed modernity as fundamentally a post-national phenomenon, seeing

development as essentially externally driven, rather than a national project (Sento-se, 2005).

Wood (1997) argues that Brazilian culture, from its colonial past, searches for a guide, a

populist and paternal streak that predisposes the culture to authoritarian leadership.

However, as in the formal-informal dimension, things are more complex than simply

an idealization of the North. As Caldas & Wood (1997) argue, Brazilian firms seek and adopt

Northern administrative systems and technologies less in the logic of instrumental rationality,

but as a symbolic status and legitimacy marker. These authors warn that organizational

analyses in Brazil often go awry because they take at face value the convergence of Brazilian

firms with those of the rest of the world, taking the faade for the reality. Rather, it is argued,

Northern administrative techniques take their place among the canons and structures that

make up the formal discourses of administration. Underneath, however, these techniques are

rewired and remixed (according to the logic of gambiarra) to meet the diversity of

organizational peculiarities that characterize the Brazilian reality. Wood and Caldas (2002;

1998) term this process organizational anthropophagy, an echo back to the modernist


24/32


movement described earlier in this chapter, and ultimately, an illusion to the original

encounter of the Portuguese with the indigenous people of Brazil.

Beyond an interesting and piquant metaphor for intercultural appropriation and

dialogue, the notion of anthropophagy constitutes an interesting social theoretic concept that

Brazil can offer to the general study of organizational behavior. In fact, athnropophagy has

been described as one of the most interesting and original theoretical concepts to come out of

Latin America more generally (Viveiros de Castro, in Cocco, 2009). This is because, in an

age of increasing multicultual mixture and self-conscious identity, anthropophagy becomes a

middle road between the extremes of cultural essentialism and isolation and cultural

assimilation and homogeneity. As some have suggested (e.g. DaMatta, 1995), the Brazilian

approach to multicultural relations may give Northern countries a glimpse of their future, and

offer a solution to the problem of living together in a multicultural world.

Conclusion

In this chapter, I have outlined some of the cultural foundations of Brazilian

administrative behavior, attempting to move beyond essentialistic trait approaches by

describing behavioral aspects as adaptive within a social and historical context. It is hoped

that such a foray can add idiographic density to the important nomothetic work done in cross-

cultural psychology and organizational behavior, and serve as one more piece to the

Brazilian Puzzle (Hess & DaMatta, 1995).

However, as was suggested in several places, such an exposition should be of interest

not only to the Brazilianist scholars or managers working with Brazilians. Rather, the

Brazilian context, as one marked by post-colonial dilemmas such as highly concentrated

urban development and high social inequality, mutlicultual negotiations, and tensions between

a dynamic and flexible informal environment and a rigid formal system, exhibits features key

to understanding the contemporary global environment. If, as DaMatta (1995) suggests,


25/32


Brazil can serve as a mirror to the North, then theorizing about Brazil becomes especially

urgent. This chapter has attempted to demonstrate paths that may be followed in future

research projects. Similarly to Brazil itself, uncertainly combines with high expectations in

seeing such future projects come to fruition.


26/32


References

Abreu, C., Costa, F.L. & Barbosa, L.O. Jeitinho Brasileiro Como Recurso de PoderRevista

de Administrao Pblica 16, (1982) 1-11.

Adler, P.S. & Borys, B. Two Types of Bureaucracy: Enabling and Coercive.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 41 (1996) 61-89.

Albert, B. South America and the First World War: The impact of the war on Brazil,

Argentina, Peru and Chile. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988).

Alcadipani, R. & Crubellate, J.M. Cultura Organizacional: Generalizaes Improvveis e

Conceituaes Imprecisas Revista de Administrao de Empresas, 43, 2, (2003) 64-77.

Amado, G.and Brasil, H.V. Organizational Behaviors and Cultural Context: The Brazilian

JeitinhoInternational Studies of Management and Organization (1991) 3861.

Andrade, O. Manifesto Antropofagico. InA Utopia Antropofagica. Obras completas de

Oswald de Andrade. (Globo: Sao Paulo, 1990. Original work published in 1928).

Andrade, O. Manifesto da Poesia Pau-Brasil. In: O. de Andrade,Do Pau-Brasil

Antropofagia e s Utopias, pp 4-10. (Rio de Janeiro: Civilizao Brasileira 1972).

Angell, A. The Left in Latin America since c. 1920. InLatin America since 1930: Economy,

Society, and Politics. Vol. 6 of Cambridge History of Latin America, pp 163-233. edited by

Leslie Bethell. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008)

Barbosa, L The Brazilian Jeitinho: An Exercise in National Identity In David J. Hess &

Roberto A. DaMatta (eds.), The Brazilian Puzzle: Culture on the Borderlands of the Western

World, pp 35-49. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995).

Barbosa, L. O Jeitinho Brasileiro: A Arte de Ser Mais Igual que os

Outros, 8a. Edio. (Rio de Janeiro: Editora Campos, 1992).

Bianchi, A. & Braga, R. Brazil: The Lula Government and Financial Globalization Social

Forces, 83, 4 (2005) 1745-1762.


27/32


Boufleur, R.N.A Questo da Gambiarra. Dissertao de mestrado. (So Paulo:FAU-USP,

2006)

Bertero, C.O. Organizao Formal e Sociedade. (Rio de Janeiro: Estudos Organizacionais,

Estudos e Pesquisa Cebrae, 1980).

Bethell, L. Politics in Brazil: From Elections without Democracy to Democracy Without

Citizenship Daedalus, 129, 2 (2000) 1-27.

Caldas, M. Santa da Casa Nao Faz Milagres: Condicionantes Nacionais e Implicacoes

Organizacionais da Fixacao Brasileira Pela Figura do Estrangeiro In Motta, F. & Caldas,

M. (eds.), Cultura Organizacional e Cultura Brasileira pp 73-93. (Sao Paulo: Atlas, 1997).

Caldas, M. & Wood, T. For the English to See: The Importation of Managerial Technology

in Late 20th Century Brazil. Organization, 4, 4, (1997), 517-34.

Campos, R.O. A Sociologia do Jeito InA Tecnica e o Riso, pp 10-22. (Rio de Janeiro:

Edicoes Apec 1966).

Carvalho, J.M. Os Bestializados. (Sao Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1987)

Carrieri, A. P; & Rodrigues, S. B. A. Tradio Aglo-saxnica nos Estudos

Organizacionais BrasileirosRevista de Administrao Contempornea, 5,

(2001) 81-102.

Chu, R.A. & Wood, T. Cultura Organizacional Brasileira Ps-globalizao: Global ou

Local? Revista de Administrao Publica, 42, 5 (2008) 969-991.

Cocco, G. Anthropophagies, Racisme, e Actions Affirmatives. Multitudes, 31, 1 (2009) 41-

53.

DaMatta, R. For an Anthropology of the Brazilian Tradition or A Virtude esta no Meio. In

David J. Hess & Roberto A. DaMatta (eds.), The Brazilian Puzzle: Culture on the

Borderlands of the Western World, pp270-291. (New York: Columbia University Press 1995).

DaMatta, R. Carnivals, Rogues, and Heroes. (Notre Dame: Univ. of Notre


28/32


Dame Press, 1991).

DaMatta, R. O que faz o Brasil, Brasil? (Rio de Janeiro: Rocca, 1984).

DiMaggio, P. Culture and Cognition, Annual Review of Sociology 23 (1997) 263-87.

Duarte, F. Exploring the Interpersonal Transaction of the Brazilian Jeitinho in Bureaucratic

Contexts Organization, 13 (2006) 509-527.

Dunphy, D. Convergence/Divergence: A Temporal Review of the Japanese Enterprise and its

Development.Academy of Management Review 12, 3 (1987) 445-459.

Faoro, R. Os Donos do Poder. (Porto Alegre: Globo 1958).

Fischer, T. O Ensino da Administracao Publica no Brasil: Os Ideiais de Desenvolvimento e

as Dimensoes da Racionalidade. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Sao Paulo 1984).

Freyre, G. Casa Grande e Senzala. (Rio de Janeiro: Jose Olmpico 1966).

Freitas, A.B. Traos Brasileiros para uma Analise Organizacional In Motta, F. & Caldas,

M. (eds.), Cultura Organizacional e Cultura Brasileira, pp 38-54. (So Paulo: Atlas 1997).

Geertz, C. Thick Description: Toward an Interpretative Theory of Culture. In The

Interpretation of Cultures. (New York: Basic Books, 1973).

Griesse, M.A. The Geographic, Political, and Economic Context for Corporate Social

Responsibility in BrazilJournal of Business Ethics, 73, 1 (2007) 21-37.

Gouveia, V. V., Albuquerque, F. J. B., Clemente, M. & Espinosa, P. Human Values and

Social Identities.International Journal of Psychology, 37, 6 (2002) 333-342.

Hall, P.A. & Soskice, D.(eds) Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of

Comparative Advantage.(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).

Hofstede, G. Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work-related Values.

(Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications 1980).

Hess, D. & DaMatta, R.A. (eds.) The Brazilian Puzzle: Culture on the Borderlands of the

Western World. (New York: Columbia University Press 1995).


29/32


Hess, D. Introduction In David J. Hess & Roberto A. DaMatta (eds.) The Brazilian Puzzle:

Culture on the Borderlands of the Western World, pp 1-30. (New York: Columbia University

Press 1995).

Holanda, S.B.Razes do Brasil, 19th Ed.(Rio de Janeiro: Jos Olympio 1996).

House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W. and Gupta, V. (eds), Culture,

Leadership and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. (Sage: Thousand Oaks,

CA, 2004).

Ibarra-Colado, E. Organization Studies and Epistemic Coloniality in Latin America:

Thinking Otherness From the Margins. Organization, 13, 4 (2006) 489-508.

Kearney, M. The Local and the Global: The Anthropology of Globalization and

TransnationalismAnnual Review of Anthropology, 24 (1995) 547-565.

Lenartowics, T. & Roth, K. Does Subculture within a Country Matter? A Cross-Culture

Study of Motivational Domains and Business Performance in BrazilJournal of International

Business Studies, 32, 2 (2001) 305-325.

Lobo, E.M.L.Historia do Rio de Janeiro: Do Capital Commercial ao Capital Industrial e

Financeiro. (Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Brasileiro de Mercados Capitais 1978).

Lubatkink M.H. & Lane, P.J., Collin, S., & Very, P Origins of Corporate Governance in the

USA, Sweden and France. Organization Studies, 26, 6 (2005) 867-888.

Martins, L. Muddling Through Changing References: Late Nation Building to the Crisis of

the Nation State.Daedalus, 129, 2 (2000) 195-2006

Meade, T.A.A Brief History of Brazil. (New York: Checkmark Books, 2004).

Mesquita, L.F. Building Global Knowledge by Leveraging Local Experiences:

How to Foster Cross-Country Research Collaboration in StrategyXXXII Encontro da

EnANPAD. Windsor Barra, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, 2008.

Mesquita, L.F.; Lazzarini, S. & Cronin, P. Determinants of Firm Competitiveness


30/32


in Latin American Emerging Economies: Evidence from Brazils Auto-Parts Industry.

International Journal of Production and Operations Management. 27, 5 (2007) 501-523.

Mignolo, W. D. Coloniality of Power and Subalternity In I. Rodrguez (ed.)

The Latin American Subaltern Studies Reader, pp 424-445. (Durham, NC: Duke University

Press 2001).

Motta, F.C.P, Alcadipani, R. & Bresler, R.B. A Valorizao do Estrangeiro como

Segregao nas Organizaes.Revista de Administrao Contemporanea, 5 (2001) 59-79.

Nabuco, J.Minha Formao. (Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo, Porto Alegre: W.M. Jackson 1949).

North, D.C.Institutions,Iinstitutional Change and Economic Performance.Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press 1990).

OKeefe H. & OKeefe, W. Business Behaviors in Brazil and the USA: Understanding the

GapsInternational Journal of Social Economics, 31, 5/6 (2004) 614-623.

Prates, M.A.S. & Barros, B.T. O Estilo Brasileiro de Administrar. In Motta, F. & Caldas, M.

(eds.), Cultura Organizacional e Cultura Brasileira 55-70. (So Paulo: Atlas 1997).

Primus, R.A. The American Language of Rights. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

1999).

ONeil, J. Building Better Global Economic BRICS. Global Economics Paper # 6. (Goldman

Sachs 2001).

Ramos, GAdministrao e Contexto Brasileiro. (Rio de Janeiro: Fundao Getulio Vargas

1983).

Ribeiro, D. O Povo Brasileiro: A Formao e o Sentido do Brasil. (So Paulo: Companhia

das Letras 1995).

Rolnick, S. Anthropophagic Subjectivity InArte Contempornea Brasileira: Um e/entre

Outro/s (So Paulo: Fundao Bienal de So Paulo 1998).


31/32


Rosenn, K.S. The Jeito: Brazils Institutional By-pass of the Formal Legal System and its

Development Implications. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 19 (1971) 519-549.

Sahlins, Marshall. Cosmologies of Capitalism: The Transpacific Sector of "The World

System In Culture/Power/History. Nicholas B. Dirks, Geoff Eley and Sherry Ortner, eds. pp.

412-435. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994).

Schein, E.H. Coming to a New Awareness of Organizational Culture. Sloan Management

Review, 25, 2 (1980) 3-16.

Angelo S. Rssia e Brasil em Transformao: Uma Breve Histria dos Partidos Russos e

Brasileiros na Democratizao Poltica. (Rio de Janeiro: Letras, 2005).

Sento-Se, J.T. Identity is the Other In Jesse Souza & Valter Sinder (eds)Imagining Brazil,

pp 211-234. (Maryland: Lexington Books 2005).

Spink, P. Discurso e Ideologia Gerencial In Motta, F. & Caldas, M. (eds.), Cultura

Organizacional e Cultura Brasileira 305-315. (So Paulo: Atlas 1997).

The Econonomist Brazil Takes Off. Nov. 12 edition. Available at

http://www.economist.com/node/14845197, 2009.

Torres, J.C.O. Interpretao de Realidade Brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Jose Olimpio Editora,

1983).

Trice, H.M. & Beyer, J. Studying Organizational Cultures through Rites and

Ceremonials. Academy of Management Review, 9, 4 (1984) 653-669.

Weber, M. The Three Types of Legitimate Rule.Berkeley Publications in Society and

Institutions, 4, 1 (1958) 1-11. Translated by Hans Gerth.

Wood, T. Terra em Transe: Liderana em Eldorado. In Motta, F. & Caldas, M. (eds.),

Cultura Organizacional e Cultura Brasileira pp 143-157. (So Paulo: Atlas 1997).

Wood, T & Caldas, M. Antropofagia Organizacional.Revista de Administrao de

Empresas, 38, 4 (1998) p. 6-17.


32/32


Wood, T. & Caldas, M.A. Adopting Imported Managerial Expertise in Developing

Countries: The Brazilian Experience.Academy of Management Executive, 16, 2 (2002) 18-

32.

World Bank, World Development Indicators Database. (2009) Available at

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GDP.pdf,

World Bank, Brazil Country Partnership Strategy, 2008-2011. (2008) Available at

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/BRAZILINPOREXTN/Resources/3817166-

1220388091471/CPS2008.pdf?resourceurlname=CPS2008.pdf

Brazil MNC'Sdraft Final

Documents

Transcript of Brazil MNC'Sdraft Final