Introduction
The theory of Hofstede on cultural dimension is a framework for cross-cultural communication. Geert Hofstede developed the theory. It gives an explanation of the effects culture in society on its members` values and how the values associate to behavior using a given structure from factor analysis. The work of Hofstede established the original research tradition in psychology of cross culture. Consultants in various fields relating to global communication and business depend on the theory. Researchers widely utilize the approach in many areas as research paradigm mostly international management and cross-cultural psychology. This paper aims to explain key concepts in the theory and link it to a possible interview.
Hofstede theory fundamental concepts
Geert Hofstede describes culture as a cumulative mind construction that differentiates people of one civilization from the others. The culture according to him is a collection of values. He classified religion by five major factors. These include power distance, masculinity/femininity, individualism/collectivism, avoiding uncertainty, and short term versus long term orientation (Hofstede, and Minkov, 2010). The theory also has its limitations. The restrictions are three. The theory focuses on only five dimensions of culture, and there exist several other factors that affect the aspect of culture. It lacks proper buildup of theory when classifying states according to ranking and the categorization is limited to only seventy countries. Lastly, it mainly emphasizes the requirement of qualitative scoring which makes it impossible for any representation in graphs.
Power Distance
It refers to the society accepting that it is lawful that the extent of authority is distributed unequally in the organizations and institutions (Bochner and Hesketh 1994). Hofstede identifies power distance as the magnitude that individuals who are less powerful within a state accept that power is unequally distributed.
Avoiding uncertainty
It relates to the society`s uncomfortable nature by the degree of change in the market (Venaik and Brewer 2010). It raises the requirement for a level of certainty in the market to enable the society to feel secure and comfortable. Uncertainty threatens members of culture. Uncertainty also refers to unknown situations.
Masculinity/femininity
Hofstede gives an explanation that masculinity relates to societies where social gender roles are transparently distinct (Schippers 2007). Femininity relates to communities where social gender roles overlap. Women and men should be tender, humble and concerned with life quality.
Individualism/collectivism
It refers to the preference of individuals to take care of themselves at the closest relative rather that depending on a group to take care of themselves (Schwartz 1994).It is autonomy and the independence of an individual. A state scores high if it is favorable in the sector of culture. They give significance for the group which gives more importance to the person. Hofstede gives a definition that individualism relates to societies whereby the tie between individuals is loose. Every person should take care of herself or himself and her or his family. Collectivist, the opposite of individuals, refers to communities in which persons from birth are moving on are incorporated into consistent and vigorous in-groups. The groups over individuals’ lifetime progress to protect them to with the aim of earning unquestionable loyalty (Hofstede and Minkov 2010).
Long term versus short term orientation
It provides an outlook on the work, life, and the relationships that are between persons and the close alliances of peoples (Hofstede and Minkov 2010). At later work, it was in a description as long-term orientation. It is characterized by organizing relations by status, persistence and a conception of shame. On the other hand, short term orientation has characteristics of stability, protecting face and personal steadiness.
Linking Hofstede Theory to a practical interview
The actual interview involves two interviewees. Interviewee one is an expatriate. Interviewee two is a repatriate. Interviewee one is Eric Mahaney. He is an American, and he worked in the United States Information Technology company as sales and marketing manager. He has been in work for more than five years in the business and flexible hours of working. He has an assignment oversee at Singapore for twelve months and just returns to home state. Initially, he had hard times communicating with staff. He also gets the difference in the United States foods and that of Singapore. Interviewee two, on the other hand, is Eustacia married to a Japanese man in Singapore. After the marriage, she followed her husband to Japan and also to work. Eustasia lived there for five years. In her stay there, she had difficulty in communication to the local. It motivated her to learn the local’s language. She is still unable to adapt Japanese culture and long working hours. She eventually made a decision to return to Singapore.
Having looked at the cases, an individual can apply the Hofstede theory in the two cases to explain the reason why things happened the way they did. The two interviewees were affected by long-term/short-term orientation and individualism/collectivism as the methods give descriptions. Eric Mahaney having assigned work at Singapore for twelve months, he was affected by short-term adjustments. He gets back to his home country from Singapore and finds difficulties in communicating with the staff members. Short term orientation has characteristics of personal steadiness. Eric Mahaney required personal steadiness to accomplish his assignment appropriately. His personal steadiness could involve learning Singlish English and also eating the Singapore foods. These foreign habits made him find it hard communicating with the staff members in American English and getting the difference between United States food and Singapore foods when he was back home. Eustasia, on the other hand, was affected by collectivism. She is a Singaporean, gets married to a Japanese gentleman, lives in Japan for some few years and then returns back to Singapore. Her reason for returning back to her home is the inability to adapt to the Japanese culture. Collectiveness refers to communities where people are integrated into robust and cohesive in groups in their places of births throughout their lifetime, and they protect them in trade of unquestionable loyalty. Eustasia valued her origin culture that she could not adapt other country’s culture due to the effect of collectivism.
Conclusion
On a cultural level, individualism is an acronym of inequality of social and hierarchical acceptance. The femininity-masculinity had mainly affected individualism. When two dimensions have a share of origin of self, individualism gets a definition as an aspect of individual position while femininity-masculinity has a relation to the dimension of the person concept. The human environment culture where an organization operates affects the process of management. Culture can refer o nations but also ethnic groups, professions, age groups, group, occupations among others. Influences of culture on management are mostly recognizable at a national level. The culture has an effect on all persons and leaders, and it controls the manner they organize.
Reference List
Bochner, S. and Hesketh, B., 1994.Power distance, individualism/collectivism, and job-related attitudes in a culturally diverse work group.Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 25(2), pp.233-257.
Hofstede, G. and Minkov, M., 2010. Long-versus short-term orientation: new perspectives. Asia Pacific Business Review, 16(4), pp.493-504.
Schippers, M., 2007.Recovering the feminine other: Masculinity, femininity, and gender hegemony.Theory and society, 36(1), pp.85-102.
Schwartz, S.H., 1994. Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. Sage Publications, Inc.
Venaik, S. and Brewer, P., 2010.Avoiding uncertainty in Hofstede and GLOBE.Journal of International Business Studies, 41(8), pp.1294-1315.
