Explain the Utility of Dimensions of National Culture to an International Manager

Explain the utility of dimensions of national culture to an international manager.

International University College, Dobrich, Bulgaria

Cardiff Metropolitan University, UK

International Business Management BA (Hons)

International Business & Cultural Difference

Assignment 1

2014

Student N° : st20076350

Philippe Bergonzoli

Bergonzoli.ph@gmail.com

Content

Introduction        

Hofstede’s dimensions        

1-The Power Distance Index        

2-Individualism versus Collectivism        

3-Masculinity versus Femininity        

4-Uncertainty Avoidance Index        

5-Long Term-Orientation versus Short Term Orientation        

6-Indulgence versus Restraint        

Comparison Overview        

Others theories        

Schwartz’s dimensions        

Inglehart’s dimensions        

GLOBE dimensions        

Culture Measurement        

Culturally endorsed implicit leadership (CLT)        

Conclusion        

References        

Introduction

The globalization has been the key which allowed the exchange and diversification of different culture. Nowadays, the proper understanding of cultural differences has become a daily matters for businesses because employees, products, services,… are located, are sold and bought across the world (Mirja Ivonen, Diane H. Sonnenwald, Maria Parma, Evelyn Poole-Kober, August 1998). The subject is not new and has been discussed and analyzed for the past four decades (Xiumei Shi, Jinying Wang, 2010).

Geert Hofstede, a Dutch social psychologist and professor emeritus of organization anthropology and international management is one of the pioneer in this study area and published in 1980 a book titled “Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values “ and introduced the first four dimensions of national culture (Geert Hofstede, website, 2014) after a six years study realized among IBM corporation’s employees.  The Professor Hofstede, analyzed “how values In the workplace are influenced by culture” in more than 70 countries and finally concluded that , the values which differentiate national culture from another can be categorized into four groups/dimensions:  1-Power Distance (PDI), 2-Individualism versus Collectivism (IDV), 3-Masculinity versus Femininity (MAS) and 4-Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI) (The Hofstede Center’s website). The theory developed in 1980 apparently has become the most used reference about Cross Cultural Management in the Social Science Citation Index according to Tony Fang, (2003). Furthermore, in 1991 Hofstede supported a research realized by Michael Harris Bond and developed the fifth dimension, 5-Long Term-Orientation versus Short Term Orientation (LTO) thanks to another international study, but that continued thanks to Michael Minkov and his book edited in 2010 where he explains and develops  the dimension number six, 6-Indulgence versus Restraint (IND) (Hofstede Center, National cultural dimensions, website).and that seems to significate that researcher are continuing to dig this sensitive subject.

In this paper, the Hofstede’s theories will be developed and explained through the comparison between Estonia and Ghana, and some other theories will be introduced as point to conclude with different variable.

Hofstede’s dimensions

1-The Power Distance Index

The Power Distance Index (PDI) has for aim to measure the degree of inequality in a defined  society/environment and it’s acceptance. According to Hofstede,(2010) “the Power Distance can therefore be defined as the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. Institutions are the basic elements of society, such as the family, the school, and the community; organizations are the places where people work.” In another terms, the PDI is supposed to represent the inequality of power among human being in a defined situation, a strong hierarchy presence (at work, home, school,…) and its acceptance or not, on a specific country.

Thanks to this graphic we can perfectly notice the differences between these two countries. In that case, an International Manager with a team composed by one Estonian member and one Ghanaian member will have to modify his behavior according to which subordinate is dealing with. The Ghanaian subordinate is represented by a high power distance index (80) and as explained by Cornelis J.Lammer (2013) and Nuno David (2008) will more likely thinks that his superior is right, accepts the order and the authority of his manager and will probably be even afraid to give an opinion or even feel uncomfortable with the fact that the superior is asking for. In another hand, the power distance index of the Estonian subordinate seems close to the middle but a bit under (40), which can means that a dictatorial leadership system will be probably unaccepted and a consultative decision making behavior from the supervisor will be welcomed.[pic 1][pic 2]

2-Individualism versus Collectivism

The Individualism versus Collectivism (IDV) dimension has for purpose to define the cultural differences and the behavior into a social environment. The collectivism profile specificities can apparently be defined by the interdependence with a group, which can be large; by the fact the common purpose has the priority over the personal aim, the rules, norms and duties are an important behavioral factor (David Matsumoto, 2008; Harry C. Triandis, 1995).but on the opposite side the individualism profile is more likely to be self-oriented, independent, to seek for specific relationship rather than a large group and will probably pay attention only to the close and direct family (Uichol Kim, 1995).[pic 3]