Assignment culture 3
The philosophies of Dr. Hofstede's dimensions are distance versus power, collectivism versus individualism, avoiding uncertainty, femininity versus masculinity and short term orientation versus long-term orientation (Sergiu, 2011). Over the years after he came up with these dimensions, there has been a variety of arguments. Some scholars are for, and some are against; to understand the basis of these arguments, it is first imperative to understand Hofstede's approach to cross culture application (Zaiț, 2002).
Dr. Hofstede's approach is used mostly in cross-cultural management (Zaiț, 2002). Cross-cultural management is the direct result of the world turning into a global village. Due to the explosion of technological breakthroughs, the world has been reduced in size to a place where communication is done with the least of effort (Sergiu, 2011). With the ease of communication, business between multinational corporations has become the norm and aided with free movement of people, goods and services have made it necessary for more businesses to join if they want to succeed. With all this changes taking place in the world, cross-cultural management has become all the more necessary (Zaiț, 2002).
The efforts by Dr. Hofstede was as a result of seeing that some subsidiaries in some countries had better results than other in others even if they belonged to the same multinational conglomerate or entity. The solution to this was that the employees were not employing the same approaches to business. As much as they had the same employer and were working under the same conditions, workers from different countries employed cultures from their countries. The differences that the employees exhibited could be attributed to three factors; human nature, culture and personality which is a combination of the other two ideas.
The approach was reached after a variety of research methods to determine the better option between holism and individualism. To figure this out, his methods kept looking into different human behavior in similar situations. He identified 4 bipolar characteristics in the employees he carried his research on. These were; distance versus power, collectivism versus individualism, avoiding uncertainty, femininity versus masculinity and short term orientation versus long term orientation. These results had an impact on both scholarly and practical uses.
Distance versus power (Sergiu, 2011). This principle refers to equality between human but in this case, workmates. This principle suggests that people prefer power rather than closeness between individuals. The principal suggests that the greater the power, the greater the distance between them (Sergiu, 2011). This Hofstede's principle is one that many scholars are critical of. Most of the scholars suggest that inequality between people should not exist at all, and it should not be substituted for power.
Another principle is individualism versus collectivism. This is the principle that relates directly to the connection between individuals in a group. On one side is individualism that is the mentality that every man should fend for himself. One the other hand is collectivism which is quite unlike communism and refers to the mentality of an individual belonging to a group dynamic.
The third principle is uncertainty avoidance. Uncertainty avoidance is the fear of an unknown future. The principle suggests that less certain one is about the future, the higher the degree of fear. In a working environment, people that are from countries where the avoiding uncertainty is low tend to be calm and collected when compared to people from countries where avoiding uncertainty is high. This principle has a direct relation to the distance versus power dynamic (Sergiu, 2011). Those that have a high degree of control over uncertainty portray a greater distance versus power dynamic compared to those that have low control.
Femininity versus masculinity is the fourth principle that is portrayed in most social settings. In most masculine settings, they portray chauvinistic tendencies where sex oriental rules must be followed (Wafa, 2014). Most males are more focused insubordination, financial status and apathy. The femininity settings are the direct opposite. They are concentrated on the connection between people, helping each other out and the overlapping roles that occur within the group dynamic. This principle has a direct relation to individualism versus collectivism.
The other principle is the short term orientation versus long-term orientation also known as the Confucius principle. On one hand, long term orientation speaks to someone's ability to stand current condition with the purpose of obtaining a long term goal. Short orientation speaks to immediate benefits (Wafa, 2014).
In order to come up with the different approaches, two questions were the determining factor. The first question was who had the power to make the decisions in the environment. The second question was what the rules were, and regulations employed so as to achieve the desired results (Wafa, 2014). The way that the two questions were being unanswered determined what bipolar dynamic that the individual belonged to (Wafa, 2014). From the onset of his research, it gained great amounts of opposition and praise. Reason for this is that some scholars believe that the approaches did not cover all there was in cross-cultural approaches.
Argument against Hofstede’s research
The first argument against these approaches, researchers, say is that they do not have an address every cultural disparity. One of the areas that it does not address is the area of cultural value. In his explanation, Hofstede says that the expertise is not considered to be the only method that he uses to come up with his approaches (Sergiu, 2011).
The other disparity against his approaches is that Hofstede use nations as a unit of analysis. Those against his approaches say that nations are not the correct unit of analysis of culture since they culture is not defined by boundaries like nations (Wafa, 2014). In his rebuttal, the researcher states that the nationality is the only measure that can be appropriate on a cross-cultural setting.
The other disparity is political influence. Approaches like femininity versus masculinity can only be considered as accurate for the time frame that the research was conducted. This means that the same data cannot be used in a more recent setting. The political atmosphere of the time has changed too drastically for the approach to be considered viable (Wafa, 2014).
Finally, the approaches are considered to be too few to cover the whole cross cultural spectrum. The researcher agrees with this statement and says that more approaches need to be added to the original 5 approaches (Wafa, 2014).
Argument for Hofstede’s research
The first supporting argument was that the initial approaches provided the right information that was relevant for startup companies at the time. Another argument that supports the approaches is that they followed strict measures (Wafa, 2014). The data collection methods that were used and analytic systems employed ensured that the approaches were sound.
Further studies on cross cultural approaches show that the initial study by Hofstede was correct. Although they were not conclusive, the researcher himself concurs with this statement agreeing that the some aspects of human nature can change over time (Wafa, 2014).
Personal Experience
Hofstede approaches have real world applications. In the Regency Hotel in Miami where I work, one approach that seems applicable is uncertainty avoidance; this approach assists to a great extent in the acceptance in the multi-cultural setting.
One such example is in hotel bookings. Since the hotel has an online booking platform, tourists from all over the world use this platform to book accommodation in the hotel. Considering the web to be new technology the prevalence of people to use it signify low uncertainty avoidance. High uncertainty avoidance among the staff and clients may be changed by a variety of factors. Some of the factors that might change uncertainty avoidance for the better include rewards, bonuses and promotions. These promotional features are being offered at the hotel therefore making reducing uncertainty avoidance among the staff and the guests.
Another approach that is used at the hotel is Confucian dynamism. This approach is also known as short term orientation versus long term orientation. As earlier explained Confucian dynamism is consideration of time with regards to rewards. Short term orientation is whereby the individual expects immediate gratification while long term orientation is concentrated on gratification on a long term basis. Those that have long term orientation are deemed to have perseverance and frugality.
The hotel uses this approach on both the staff and the guest. The hotel puts mechanisms in place to advocate for long term orientation among the staff and short term orientation among the guests. This means that the staff will serve longer for a greater reward while the guest will enjoy their experience at the hotel with quicker results.
References
Sergiu, P. I. (2011). Specific Approaches in Cross Cultural Management Research in Geert Hofstede's Studies. Acta Universitatis Danubius , 5 (1).
Wafa, Z. B. (2014). The Role of Uncertainty Avoidance on E-Commerce Acceptance across Cultures. (U. M. School of Business and Economics, Ed.) International Business Research, 7 (5).
Zaiț, D. (2002). Cross cultural management. Bucharest: Economică.
