Gaining a perspective on Turkish value orientations: implications for expatriate managers.

Gopalan, Suresh ; Kavas, Alican ; Nelson, Reed 等

ABSTRACT

Turkey's emergence as a significant player in the international business arena and its potential membership with the EU have created a need to gain a better understanding of Turkish cultural values. The primary objectives of this paper are to offer Western expatriate managers (US, UK, Germany, France, Holland, etc.) an accurate perspective of Turkish national culture and discuss their impact on business practices. This paper also uses the case of dualistic forces in Turkish culture to illustrate the types of sub-cultural dynamics that are common in many societies and the implications of these tensions for cross national management.

INTRODUCTION

Turkey is strategically located at the cross-roads of southwestern Asia and southeastern Europe bordering the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, sharing its northwestern border with Greece and Bulgaria; its western border with Georgia, Armenia, and Iran and its southeastern border with Syria and Iraq. Turkey has a population of approximately 69 million of which 80% are Turkish and 20% Kurdish. The predominant religion is Islam (99.8%) with Christians and Jews making up rest of the population. The official language is Turkish but other regional languages include Kurdish, Arabic, Armenian, and Greek. Turkey has the distinction of being the only secular democracy among the world's 52 Muslim states. Additionally, Turkey was also identified as one of the "big 10" emerging economies by the Clinton administration (CIA World Fact book 2003; Economist country briefings: Turkey, 2005)

The Turkish economy has gone through some dramatic structural changes. Starting from the 1980's and through the 1990's the Turkish economy transitioned from a controlled centralized system that believed in import-substitution dominated by state run enterprises to a market based model where the private sector has emerged as a key player. State-owned assets such as Turk Telecom are being auctioned as part of the privatization effort. These measures are expected to fetch approximately $7 billion which will be used to pay off the national debt which is estimated to be 7 per cent of Turkey's gross domestic product (Cave and Firn, 2005). Additionally, restrictions have eased on foreign investors and businesses.

The share of agriculture as a percentage of GDP has steadily decreased to 15% while services sector accounts for 58% (Aycan, 2001). With a GDP of $240 billion, the Turkish economy is currently ranked as 17th largest in the world. The leading trading partners are Germany, UK, US, Italy, Russia, Switzerland and France. The EU has not only emerged as the largest supplier for Turkey accounting for 46% of all supplies, it is also the largest market for Turkish goods accounting for 52% of all Turkish products. Of the top 175 investors, 16% are from France, 13.2% from Germany, 11% from Holland, 10% from Japan, 7.4% from Switzerland, and 7% from the USA (Yavas and Bodur, 1999; Economist country briefings: Turkey, 2005).

The liberalization of the Turkish economy and the transition to a free market has increased interaction between Turkish nationals and managers from Europe, UK, and the US. The level of business activity is expected to increase with Turkey's projected membership into the EU community scheduled for 2015. Despite these developments, many Western managers continue to harbor several fears, doubts, and stereotypes of Turkish culture (Dombey and Boland, 2005). A large number of Europeans have serious concerns about Turkish identity with European culture and commitment to secularism. In an article published in the Financial Times (Parker, Minder, and Boland, 2004, p. 4), Jean-Pierre Raffarin the French Prime Minister was quoted in a Wall Street Journal interview with the following comment: "Do we want the river of Islam to enter the riverbed of secularism?"

The skepticism was further enhanced when the Turkish government proposed a change to the penal code in 2004 that would make adultery a criminal offence. While this proposal was considered to have grassroots support by many Turkish citizens, there was a general outcry in Europe that this proposal was an "invasion of privacy" and incompatible with European codes of human rights (Boland and Dobey, 2004). Others saw it as an attempt to infuse an Islamic religious doctrine into a secular lifestyle. This move seriously jeopardized Turkey's accession talks with the EU community--the issue was finally resolved when the Erdogan administration withdrew the proposed legislation.

The continuing modernization of the Turkish economy and Turkey's interest in the EU suggest the predominance of a utilitarian, capitalist mindset, but the country's Islamic heritage and patterns of political mobilization suggest otherwise. This apparent contradiction leads to several questions: "Is Turkey a secular state or an Islamic one? Are Turkish values and beliefs impacted by religion? Are values and beliefs followed uniformly throughout the country? Are there cultural differences between urban and rural areas? Are Turkish citizens conservative or progressive? Do women have the same rights as men?" The answers are of interest to Western managers and others seeking a better understanding of Turkish culture and values.

We speak to these questions in this paper, but our more important contribution will be to identify the ambivalence that exists around traditional and modern values in Turkey itself, and how Turkish society expresses and deals with this ambivalence. Besides dispelling negative stereotypes, we hope our ideas will enable Western expatriates to adapt their business and other management practices to be compatible with Turkish culture.

EVOLUTION OF TURKISH VALUES-THE PRESENCE OF DUALISM

Turkey is a country whose history spans many centuries across two continents. It is imperative to gain an understanding of Turkey's history to understand Turkish values. At its height, the Ottoman Empire centered in Turkey was not only one of the largest empires in the world but was also the largest European kingdom as well. As early as the 19th century, the Ottoman Empire absorbed several European influences that were willingly accepted by the ruling segment of the population--these values were further reinforced by the republic established by Kemal Ataturk in 1923.

In his quest to establish a modern secular state fashioned after the European model, Ataturk created a separation between the state and religion (Islam), borrowed heavily from the French and Swiss legal systems, created a secular educational system, adopted Latin script languages, and banned women from wearing veils and headscarves. Such reforms were willingly accepted by an urban population that was Westernized, secular, and part of the power elite--but grudgingly tolerated by the rural populace which was more traditional and conservative by nature. After Ataturk's death, earlier traditions began to resurface--there was an increased appreciation among the Turkish people towards their Ottoman past and a gradual loosening of the tight compartmentalization of religious expression and symbolism in public life (Rouleau, 1993).

Scholars who have studied modern day Turkish culture have noted the "dualism" that is characteristic of Turkish society that has evolved due to a juxtaposition of Western secular values with traditional Turkish values such as conservatism and collectivism (Wasti, 1998; Kasaba and Bozdogan, 2000; McDaniel, 2003). Dualism also exists as the pace of industrialization and modernization has impacted different segments of Turkish society in very different ways. As noted by Cavusgil et al., 2003, p. 476), "... in major urban areas there is the same cosmopolitan atmosphere found in any modern city in terms of infrastructure, lifestyles, fashion, and shopping habits. In the rural sector, traditional social values are still safeguarded." Wasti (1998, p. 15) notes, "... there is a striking difference in the values and lifestyles of the 'Westernized' urban segments of the society when compared to the rural population and city dwellers."

In his study of Turkish sub-cultures, Kozan (2002) identified two distinct groups in Turkish society: the first group (Egalitarians) continues to press for Westernization, secularism, and modernization whereas the second group (Traditionalists) would like to adhere to a more traditional outlook and lifestyle infused with Islamic values (not be confused with those advocating a fundamentalist perspective). Members of the military, civil bureaucracy, and long-time urban residents display a secular and Western outlook. Traditionalists are predominantly from smaller towns, villages, rural areas and include recent migrants to big cities. Historically members of the latter group have not occupied the seat of power but their numbers are growing and many political parties are paying greater attention to their needs and aspirations.

Traditionalists emphasize values such as hospitality, politeness, devoutness, preservation of public image, obedience, social recognition, social order, reciprocation of favors, chastity of women, and respect for tradition among other values (Kozan, 2002; p. 93). Egalitarians emerged during Ataturk's era and espoused values that revolved around equality, application of universal rules and role based transactions instead of reciprocal obligations that have evolved due to social relationships, and collectivism. The Turkish military and others in the power structure have continued to staunchly defend the "Kemalist" system that advocates separation of state and religion (Islam).

In recent years, Turkish society has witnessed a relocation of Traditionalists from rural areas to cities where Egalitarians have traditionally tended to dominate. These rural participants have become very active in Turkish politics and industry (Kasaba and Bozdogan, 2000). This increased contact between the two groups with very different values has created a tension in Turkish social life. Kasaba and Bosdogan (2000), This contact has led to the emergence of a third group in the Turkish social scenery that is a hybrid of both Traditional and Egalitarian values.

According to Kasaba and Bozdogan (2000, p. 7),

 By the 1990's, most of those who were in the forefront of Islamist
 politics in Turkey were engineers, doctors, lawyers and other
 professionals and they articulated an ideology that blended (our
 emphasis) social conservatism with remarkable flexibility and
 openness regarding Turkey's economic and technological integration
 with the outside world. As an increasingly diverse population
 congregated in big cities, this blend of Islam and modernity created
 a cultural outlook that is relatively open, flexible and more sure-
 footed than that of the older elite. Today, this segment of Turkish
 society is becoming increasingly well represented in the most
 prestigious schools as well as in the newly expanding fields of
 communications, finance, international commerce, and investment.

After reviewing several studies that examined contemporary Turkish Culture, Karakitapoglu-Aygun (2004) and Fullager, Sumer, Sverke, and Slick (2003), theorize that Turkish culture is transitioning in a shift towards Individualism. Yet the nature of Individualism is uniquely Turkish in that it is "accompanied by deep-seated traditional values related to being a member of an in-group" reflecting a hybrid of traditional Turkish and Western values."

We label this emerging third cultural group as Turkey's Islamic Democrats and consider them to represent a middle position in the continuum of Turkish society. The vast majority of Islamic Democrats support globalization and Turkey's membership in the European Union. Further they consider open relations with Western nations as one of the best guarantees of political and religious freedom.

From the discussion above, it seems clear that there are at least three important sub-cultural orientations in Turkey today, and that the way these orientations compete and interrelated needs to be understood if theoretical and practical miscues are to be avoided. And while Turkey may be somewhat unique in the extent or the particular contours of its dualism, it is not likely alone. We suspect the nations that Organski (1965) labeled "old countries"--those with longstanding and highly developed cultural identities and traditions--are likely to exhibit similar dualisms. India, Thailand, China, and Japan come to mind among others. Even modern, secularized, capitalist nations may not be exempt. In a tri-national study of organizational culture, Nelson and Gopalan (2003) found that not only Indian and Brazilian organizations experienced traditional versus modern dualisms in their organizational cultures; North American organizations also showed evidence of cultural ambivalence around core capitalistic values.

TURKISH CULTURAL VALUES AND THEIR IMPACT ON MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

A number of studies (Hofstede, 1980; Ronen 1986; Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, 1998) have identified Turkish culture as being high on collectivism, power distance, and conservatism. Kabasakal and Bodur (1998) noted the presence of feudal relationships that characterized leader-follower relations. This has resulted in many Turkish organizations having: centralized-decision making structures, highly personalized leadership that is both autocratic and paternalistic, an emphasis on hierarchy, and an expectation of a patronage relationship. Pasa's (2000) study on leadership influence in Turkish organizations found that those in leadership positions simply use their "formal power/authority" to obtain compliance from their subordinates. Leaders frequently assume the role of a parent, remove all discretionary responsibility from subordinates, and provide advice, counsel, and protection at all levels. In return, the subordinates are expected to provide absolute loyalty and support. Yavas and Bodur (1999) note that family members (not professional managers) are in top leadership positions in many Turkish organizations. Family owned conglomerates are fairly common in Turkey, similar to organizational structures found in India and many Latin American countries (Cavusgil et al., 2003). Trust resides with family members.

Western managers must demonstrate sensitivity and flexibility in their leadership styles to be effective with Turkish peers and subordinates. Turkish subordinates may exhibit a high degree of dependency by frequently asking for advice and guidance. Such behaviors should be viewed in the context of long standing Turkish culture that has emphasized high power distance and dependence. Loyalty is expected and rewarded-Turkish subordinates will go the extra mile towards superiors who cultivate personal loyalty. A paternalistic yet personalized leadership style may be most effective with many subordinates (Pasa, 2000). Alternatively there may be others schooled in Western thought who are independent in their behavior and outlook. Leadership styles that delegate authority and independence and which are participatory in nature should be more effective with the latter group.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Turkish culture places a premium on being hospitable, cultivating personalized relationships, and saving face (Cavusgil, Civi, Tutek, Dalgic, 2003; Kozan and Ilter, 1994). Turks are warm and generous hosts and regardless of one's socio-economic status, guests are treated with great honor (misafir). Expatriates (especially from European and Anglo cultures) may consider lavish displays of food and drink to be excessive--but from the Turkish perspective, guests are seen as symbols of good fortune to one's home and are treated accordingly. In social situations, there is an expectation that each and every person in a room should be personally greeted--not doing so, is considered as an insult resulting in an individual to lose face. Turkey is a high context culture where verbal communication and personalized face-to-face contact are emphasized more than written communication. Therefore, business lunches and dinners tend to be more formal and lengthy in nature.

Personal and professional relationships overlap in Turkish culture. Unlike Western cultures, where friendship obligations are generally not extended to work related issues, the Turkish people have a broad concept of friendship which may include requests for work-related favors. An expectation of reciprocity based on friendship may be viewed as an intrusive habit by Western expatriates. On the other hand, lack of reciprocity may be viewed as a disappointment by Turks--resulting in loss of face. This has the potential of creating a misunderstanding and damaging a productive business relationship. Expatriates are encouraged to use indirect, subtle, and face-saving communication techniques if they are unable to comply with such requests.

Turkish culture is polychronic with respect to time orientation. Western expatriates may find that their conversations with Turkish executives may be delayed, interrupted by phone calls or visitors and staff walking in and out of scheduled meetings. Managers raised in monochromic time oriented cultures may leave with an impression that the workplace is chaotic, unorganized, with very little privacy. But in Turkey, an effective manager is one who deals with multiple tasks while interacting with several individuals immediately and simultaneously. This is a critical skill that managers would need to possess to be successful in Turkey. Notwithstanding polychronic time orientation, punctuality is important and expected in business settings. The emphasis regarding punctuality is mixed; it is more important in urban than rural areas.

Aycan (2001) notes that many Western human resource (HR) management practices should be modified for Turkish work environments. Given the high power distance in Turkish culture, performance evaluations tend to be one way, i.e. from the superiors to the subordinates. Self-assessment exercises are generally ineffective as Turkish employees tended to rate themselves considerably lower than their superiors. This information suggests that the use of 360 degree feedback processes may have limited relevance in Turkish work environments. Giving negative feedback in a direct manner may create conflict as saving face and maintaining group harmony are important in Turkish culture.

Aycan (2001) cites an Arthur Anderson study conducted in 2000 that examined human resource management practices in 307 private sector Turkish organizations. Recruiting is primarily done using one-on-one interviews--testing as a recruiting tool was used by only 10% of the sample. Extrinsic rewards such as bonus and salary increases are popular and widely used. Intrinsic rewards that single out individual achievement and performance are not very popular--singling out one individual over others in a group is unpopular in a collective culture that values group harmony. The most important factor impacting salary increase is the inflation rate followed by individual performance and tenure with the company. The study concludes that while few Turkish firms have world-class HR processes and systems in place, overall HR practices in the majority of Turkish organizations are in a nascent state.

In two separate studies, Kozan (1989, 2002) found that hierarchy played a significant role in impacting Turkish conflict management styles. Overall, the tendency is to be more accommodative towards one's superiors (respect for authority); suppressing/and or avoiding competition between peers (focus on collectivism and group harmony); and imposing solutions on subordinates (analogous to a parent-child relationship). Traditionalists and Egalitarians chose problem-solving as the most preferred approach suggesting a social desirability bias (Kozan 2002). Traditionalists chose avoidance as the fallback option while Egalitarians chose accommodation as their fall back option. These results have implications for expatriate managers working for multinationals who will deal with a variety of Turkish nationals. They need to be trained to identify diversity and become familiar with appropriate conflict resolution styles of various Turkish groups.

Given uncertainty around the degree to which Turks are willing to set aside traditional beliefs and practices in favor of secularism and equalitarianism, an issue of great interest would be the assignment of women expatriate managers to Turkey. Subject to certain conditions, Taylor and Napier (2001, p. 359) mention that "In general, if properly prepared, a woman professional should have no great difficulty in working successfully in Turkey, and can be just as successful if not more so than a foreign man." Women executives can maximize their effectiveness in a variety of ways: by working in certain types of occupations such as accounting and banking over others like agriculture; occupying a senior position in a multinational or a large Turkish holding company; being older, working and living in bigger cities like Istanbul and Ankara which have several entertainment and social outlets; and being married. A large amount of Turkish social life revolves around the family-consequently, socializing options are limited for single women.

The response to taking orders from and working with women managers to a large extent depends upon the location and the sub-cultural group to which a Turk belongs. Urban Turks are very progressive and sophisticated. In their immediate families, both men and women attend universities, obtain degrees, and hold high positions in organizations. As an example, we would like to cite the case of Guler Sabanci (niece of Sakip Sabanci) who became the CEO of the Sabanci Holdings; a $12 billion dollar conglomerate and one of Turkey's largest multinationals (Breaking into a man's world, 2005). Woman expatriate managers who work with Turkish individuals with this background (urban, secular, Western outlook) will encounter little or no difficulty in having a productive work relationship (Karakitapoglu-Aygun, 2004). However, women expatriate managers will face difficulties when dealing with Turkish men whose origins are from small villages and rural areas. These men have traditionally "ordered" their wives and daughters and resist taking orders from a woman manager.

The secular values adopted by Ataturk, gave women access to institutions of higher learning and the right to vote. On the flip side, since women are considered to be responsible for raising children and maintaining family relationships, these societal expectations again act as barriers to career advancement. These factors are an illustration of the dualism that is characteristic of Turkish society. Turkish women comprise 36% of the labor force population (Fullager et al., 2003). All trends indicate an increasing participation of women in Turkish organizations.

CONCLUSION

We hope that the earlier discussion aids in the success of Western expatriates who are assigned to Turkey. This information should be considered as a starting point to an expatriate's cross-cultural awareness of Turkey. Needless to say, depending upon the length of stay and degree of interaction with host country nationals, expatriates may need more rigorous cross-cultural training (Black and Mendenhall, 1989). There are several trends/issues that Western expatriates must keep in mind as they consider doing business in Turkey.

First, Turkey's ties to Europe are bound by history and commerce. Turkey is a member of NATO, OECD, the Council of Europe, the Conference of Security and Cooperation in Europe, etc. Turkey receives huge capital inflows from European countries; its primary trading partners are all based in Europe. As Turkey's projected date of 2015 looms closer, the pace of free market reforms and openness of Turkey's economy will continue to increase. With its large and young population (57% of Turkey's population is under the age of 30) and proximity to many countries, Turkey will continue to remain a very attractive market for locating manufacturing activities and for selling consumer durables.

Next, Turkey is a diverse country and the expatriate manager will experience diversity in their interaction with Turkish nationals. For our discussion, three groups were identified and discussed--these 3 groups should be considered representing a continuum in Turkish society. Traditionalists represent Turkish values that predate the establishment of the Republic; the Egalitarians who represent Western secular values that Kemal Ataturk sought to inculcate; and the Islamic Democrats who combine elements of the previous two groups. Expatriates must understand that the Turkish people with whom they have most initial contact and with whom they communicate most easily are likely to belong to a subgroup that is not representative of the entire country in aspirations or perspective. Those who are likely to work with a foreign manager are by education, social class and political orientation, if by not temperament, likely to belong to subgroups that are numerically small and that vary from other subgroups in important ways.

Due to the dominance of military and the ruling establishment, expatriates are more likely to come into contact with members of the Egalitarians as they are disproportionately represented in organizations (especially multinationals) as managers or executives. But as the power and number of Traditionalists increase, expatriates will increase their contact with this group as well.

Expatriate managers must first learn to recognize cultural differences among Turks and become aware who they are dealing with. Conflict-resolution or communication styles that work with Egalitarians may be ineffective with Traditionalists and vice versa. Expatriates must understand that almost any program, policy, or administrative action they frame will be interpreted in at least two different ways, depending on the perspective of a subgroup member. Moreover, these interpretations may seem to be quite distant from the meaning that the manager sees in his/her action. Even in relatively homogenous countries and organizations, there is dissension around many seemingly technical decisions. Actions are interpreted in terms of what subgroups stand to gain or loose from a given action and the symbolic value of an action may be as important as its practical impact. In dualistic nations such as Turkey, this is even more likely to be the case.

It is probably unrealistic for expatriates to expect to be equally accepted by all the major subgroups in a society. In such instances, it is best not to take negative reactions personally. In a polarized situation, it is almost impossible not to be seen as partial to one side or another. At the same time, the manager should try to at least catalogue which groups exist, and gain some knowledge of their major catchwords, heroes, spokespersons, and symbols. Among these will be some that are particularly sensitive, or which have surplus meanings that far beyond their simple translation from one language to another. Before any major address, ceremony or memorandum, check with at least a couple of Turkish nationals to gauge the likely impact of a position on different groups. While it may not be possible to please everyone, it is foolish to antagonize host country nationals needlessly or carelessly.

Partly due to history and partly due to recent events such as 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and other acts of terrorism by a religious minority, many in the West are unable to differentiate between moderate Muslims versus Islamic fundamentalism and extremism. They are unable to distinguish between the dictates of a theocratic state like Iran versus a vibrant democracy like Turkey where many Turks who are active devout Muslims also wish to live in a secular country. The adoption of a democratic political system combined with free-market reforms have been instrumental in creating a more open and free atmosphere where many Turks are able to appreciate their Ottoman culture and heritage and freely practice Islam. According to Kramer (1999) and Cukur, De Guzman and Carlo (2004), Islam will continue to play an important role in Turkish politics, but it is exemplified by a progressive outlook that is appealing to many urban middle class residents and younger generation. Europeans and others who deal with Turkey must acknowledge this emerging image as a fact. Indeed one might speculate that Turkey's comparative economic vitality compared to other Muslim nations comes from an ability to embrace many aspects of modernism while enjoying the benefits of a rich cultural tradition.

REFERENCES

Aycan, Z. (2001). Human resource management in Turkey-Current issues and future challenges. International Journal of Manpower, 22(3), 252-258.

Black, J. S., and M. Mendenhall (1989). A practical but theory based approach to selecting cross-cultural training methods. Human Resource Management, 28(4), 511-539.

Boland, V., and D. Dombey (2004, September 14), Turkey defends adultery rule as 'social', Financial Times, 4.

Breaking into a man's world, Retrieved February 21, 2005 from http://economist.com/business/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=3599327.

Cave, F. T., and Firn, D. (2005, February 24), Turk Telecom to head $7bn auction, Financial Times, 2.

Dombey, D., and V. Boland (2004, September 13). EU gives ultimatum to Turkey on adultery law, Financial Times, 4.

Cavusgil, T. S., Civi, E., Tutek, H. H., and Dalgic, T. (2003). Doing Business in Turkey. Thunderbird International Business Review, 45(4), 467-479.

Cukur, C. S., M. R. T. De Guzman, G. Carlo. (2004). Religiosity, values, and horizontal and vertical Individualism-Collectivism: A study of Turkey, the United States, and the Philippines, The Journal of Social Psychology, 144(6), 613-634.

Economist.com-Country briefing Turkey. Retrieved February 15, 2005, from http://economist.com/countries/Turkey

Fullager, J., F., H.C. Sumer, M. Sverke, R. Slick. (2003). Managerial sex-role stereotyping: A cross-cultural analysis. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 3(1), 93-106.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories apply abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 2(Summer), 98-122.

McDaniel, C. (2003). Islam and the global society: A religious approach to modernity. Brigham Young University Law Review, 2, 507-540.

Kasaba, R., and S. Bozdogan (2000). Turkey at a crossroad. Journal of International Affairs, 54(1), 1-20.

Kabasakal, H., and M. Bodur (1988). Leadership, values and Institutions: The case of Turkey, research paper, Bogazici University, Istanbul.

Karakitapoglu-Aygun, Z. (2004). Self, identity, and emotional well-being among Turkish university students. The Journal of Psychology, 138(5), 457-478.

Kozan, M. K. (1989). Cultural influences on styles of handling interpersonal conflicts: Comparisons among Jordanian, Turkish, and U.S. Managers. Human Relations, 42, 787-789.

Kozan, M. K. and S.S. Ilter (1994). Third party roles played by Turkish managers in subordinates' results. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(5), 453-466.

Kozan, M. K. (2002). Subcultures and conflict management Style. Management International Review, 42(1), 89-105.

Kramer, H. (1999). Turkey: In search of national consensus and a new political order. Brookings Review, Summer, 33-35.

Nelson, R. E., and S. Gopalan. (2003). Do organizational cultures replicate national cultures? Isomorphism, Rejection and Reciprocal Opposition in the Corporate Values of three countries, Organization Studies, 24(7), 1115-1151.

Organski, A. F. K. (1965). The Stages of Political Development. Knopf: New York.

Parker, G., R. Minder, and V. Boland (2004, September 24). Turkey removes adultery hurdle to EU entry, Financial Times, 4.

Pasa, S. F. (2000). Leadership influence in a high power distance and collectivist culture. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(8), 414-424.

Rouleau, E. (1993). The challenges to Turkey. Foreign Affairs, 72(5), 110-126.

Tamer, C. T., E. Civi, H.H. Tutek, T. Dalgic. (2003). Doing business in Turkey. Thunderbird International Business Review, 45(4), 467-479.

Taylor, S., and Nancy K. Napier (2001). An American woman in Turkey: Adventures unexpected and knowledge unplanned. Human Resource Management, 40(4), 347-364.

Trompenaars, F., and C. Hampden-Turner (1998). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in global business, 2nd edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Yavas, U., and M. Bodur (1999). Satisfaction among expatriate managers: correlates and consequences. Career Development International, 4(5), 261-269.

Wasti, S. A. (1998). Cultural barriers in the transferability of Japanese and American human resources practices to developing countries: The Turkish case. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9(4), 608-631.

Suresh Gopalan, Winston-Salem State University Alican Kavas, Winston-Salem State University Reed Nelson, Southern Illinois University

Table 1
Economic Indicators

Population (m) 72.3 million (2004)
Median age 27.3 years
Life expectancy 72 years
GDP (purchasing power parity) $567.19 billion (2004)
GDP composition by sector agriculture: 11.7%
industry: 29.8%
services: 58.5%
GDP growth rate 4.3% (2004)
Labor costs per hour (USD) 1.81
Labor force 23.79 million
Recorded unemployment 10.65%

Major Exports (2004) % of total

Clothing and textiles 27.9
Road vehicles 13.1
Electrical machinery 8.4
Iron and steel 7.6
Fruits and vegetables 3.8
Total exports (USD billion) 61

Leading markets (2004)

Germany 13.9
UK 8.8
US 7.7
Italy 7.4
France 5.8
EU 54.6

Major Imports (2004) % of total

Machinery & appliances 22.4
Petroleum products 14.8
Iron & steel products 10.5
Road vehicles 8.2
Plastics and vegetables 4.9
Total imports (USD billion) 60.8

Leading Suppliers (2004)

Germany 12.8
Italy 9.3
Russia 7
France 6.4
US 4.9
EU 46.6

* compiled from General Directorate of Foreign Investment and
General Directorate of Foreign Exchange of Treasury-Country
Commercial Guide; http://economist.com/countries/Turkey; CIA
World Fact book 2003; U.S. Department of State Country background
notes (source date: 08/04) retrieved from http://globaledge.msu/ibrd/
countryeconomyprint.asp?CountryID=76&regionID=2

Other Indicators

Corruption Perception Index-2004: Score: 3.2 (77 out of 146 countries)

IMD Word Competitiveness Yearbook 2005: Score 51.293 (48 out of 60
countries)

Index of Economic Freedom 2005: Score 3.46 (112 out of 155
countries)

Table 2

Turkey: A chronology of key events

Date Events

1923 Once the centre of the Ottoman Empire, the modern
 republic was established by nationalist leader Kemal
 Ataturk. Assembly declares Turkey to be a republic
 and Kemal Ataturk as president. Sweeping social,
 political, linguistic, and economic reforms are
 introduced to form the new ideological base for
 Turkey. In the post-Ataturk era, his reforms began
 to be referred to as "revolutions." Kemalism
 comprises a Turkish form of secularism, strong
 nationalism, statism, and to a degree a western
 orientation.

1924 Rights for women to be elected for the parliament

1925 Adoption of Gregorian calendar. Prohibition of the
 fez. Hat was introduced

1928 Turkey becomes secular: clause-retaining Islam as
 state religion removed from constitution

1928 Introduction and the acceptance of the Roman alphabet

1931 The Metric system was introduced

1934 Religious attire was prohibited in public

1949 Membership to the Council of Europe

1952 Turkey abandons Ataturk's neutralist policy and
 joins NATO

1963 Association agreement signed with European Economic
 Community (EEC)

1987 Turkey applies for full EEC membership

1995 Pro-Islamist Welfare Party wins elections but lacks
 support to form government--two major centre-right
 parties form anti-Islamist coalition.

1996 Centre-right coalition falls. Welfare Party leader
 heads first pro-Islamic government since 1923.

1998 Welfare Party--the largest in parliament--banned.

1999 Recognition as Candidate for EU accession

2001 Constitutional Court bans opposition pro-Islamic
 Virtue Party, saying it had become focus of
 Saadet is set up by former Virtue Party members in
 July. EU anti-secular activities. New pro-Islamist
 party has asked Turkey to limit military's role in
 politics

2002 Turkish men are no longer regarded in law as head
 of the family. The move gives women full legal
 equality with men, 66 years after women's rights
 were put on the statute books.

2002 Islamist-based Justice and Development Party (AK)
 wins landslide election victory. Party promises
 to stick to secular principles of constitution.
 Secularists regard headscarves as symbols of
 radical Islam

2002 Parliament approves reforms aimed at securing EU
 membership.

2003 Eyeing future EU membership, parliament passes
 further laws easing restrictions on freedom of
 speech, Kurdish language rights, and on reducing
 political role of the military.

2004 Turkey signs protocol banning death penalty in all
 circumstances, a move welcomed in EU circles

2004 Turkish state television broadcasts first Kurdish
 language program

2004 Parliament approves penal code reforms introducing
 tougher measures to prevent violence against women
 and torture. Controversial proposal on
 criminalizing adultery dropped.

2004 EU leaders agree to open talks in 2005 on Turkey's
 EU accession.