Hofstede’s Dimension of Culture Model
An Analysis of the Hofstede Model
Globalization in the current business environment has resulted into a business workf that is seamless. There are no longer physical barriers that limit communication and trade. Seamlessness refers to a world where economic, political and cultural barriers are eliminated. The utmost focus of this essay will be on cultural globalization analyzing in detail what brings about the different dimensions of culture.
The general idea of culture has different meanings depending on the context in which it has been used. Schein (2016) defines culture as knowledge and characteristic of a certain group of people and encompasses religion, music, arts, and cuisine among other social habits. Geert Hofstede’s theory on the dimensions of culture shall be particularly of interest in this discussion. He is a renowned author who performed a study in fifty countries to look at the unique aspects of culture in the different cultures and rated them on a scale for comparison. Hofstede was able to identify different categories of cultural dimensions namely; power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism/collectivism, masculinity/femininity and long-term/ short-term orientation.
Flaws in the Model
Hofstede’s dimension of culture has it its flaws that have been criticized by several authors. This paper hence analyzes the criticisms as well as identifies other frameworks that have been used to describe the dimensions of culture.
Geert Hofstede explained different people have different outlooks on life that are influenced by their cultures. In his power distance cultural dimension, Hofstede explained that the culture shows great respect for hierarchy. Children in a culture that has high power distance show great respect for their elders. The same is portrayed in the workplaces. There is a significant regard for power in such societal settings and autocracy is generally accepted (Hofstede, Hofstede & Minkov 2010). On the contrary, in a low power distance society, inequality is not seen as appropriate. People want to be engaged in the decision making process and would prefer a more democratic leader.
Individualism verses Collectivism
The focus on individualism verses collectivism dimension is on the questions about whether people prefer a close nit society or prefer work alone for one’s own personal accomplishment (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 1997). An individualistic society gives priority to people accepting to work alone, focusing on self and autonomy rather than working collectively as part of a group. In contrast, a collective orientation in the society concerns itself with the overall success of the group as opposed to gauging one’s own personal accomplishment. Americans by way of illustration, have a more individualistic cultural dimension. They place value on the freedom to work alone, accomplish challenging work and at the end of the day achieve self- actualization. Japan on the other hand has a collectivism orientation (Hofstede, Hofstede and Minkov 2010).
Criticisms of the Hofstede Model
Uncertainty avoidance expresses the degree to which members of a society feel intimidated with uncertainty and ambiguity and would much rather device methods or rules to avoid them. In a culture that has high uncertainty avoidance, there is a preference for structure, rules and policy. People are more willing to do things by the book to avoid mistakes. In contrast, societies with low uncertainty avoidance will more readily take risks but the existence of rules instills fear in them and would much rather have rules when absolutely necessary.
According to Hofstede, the masculinity dimension of culture represents a preference in society for success, achievement, competition, heroism and material rewards for triumph. On the other hand, femininity stands for a preference for more tender values such as cooperation, modesty, caring for the weak and quality of life.
Long-term cultural orientation dimension can be interpreted as dealing with society’s value of future outcomes (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 1997). A society that has the long-term orientation values persistence, perseverance and saving while aligning their strategies towards achieving future set goals. Societies that have a short-term orientation dimension generally have a concern with establishing and building the present and while considering the past. It is easy to see that different cultural have different views of the world based on their cultures and histories. An understanding of these areas and being able to identify them, helps to work with and understand the diversity in backgrounds.
Although Hofstede’s model is generally accepted as the most comprehensive framework used to explain the differences in cultural values, it is not short of limitations. Critics of the Hofstede model would put it that model is essentialist. This means that the model tries to state that everyone has an innate essence of which they are. You are essential “born into it” so “must you be” and it is inescapable. For instance, the cultural dimension of femininity that describes women as innately caring and nurturing is an essentialist assumption (Spencer-Oatey & Franklin 2009). While in some areas of culture this may be true and accepted this is not stationery as it changes from one culture to another and throughout history. Noteworthy is the certitude that, essentialism is not true to everyone. It is a fallacy to state that everyone is innately something. From the individualistic dimension of culture, though known that USA has an individualistic culture, it may not be applicable to every person in the United States of America. Individualism holds that, every person should be hardworking in the workplace, people should take the initiative to learn on their own. This may stands as a great guideline for a lot of companies in the USA but may not be true for each person or organization. An organization doing charity work, for instance, would prefer collectivism to individualism.
Responses to Criticisms
These theories however could be particularly helpful in giving insights into what the general practices of a country are (Schneider 2006). The power distance dimension, though also not applicable to all companies or countries, could be an indicator of hierarchy of power. An indication of the value for the chain of command and a guideline of how power is to distributed equally or unequally 2002. Another obvious weakness in this model is that the data collected is relatively old hence may not fully record the evolution in the business world today (Hofstede 2011). Moreover, the data collected was only from a few organizations and therefore cannot be a representation of an entire nations culture. It also assumes the uniformity of culture across an organization.
Other cultural frameworks of the dimensions of culture in nations include the works a Dutch researcher by the name Fons Trompenaars (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 1997). In his research in over 40 countries, he came up with a seven dimensions framework that is more recent. Five of the identified dimensions of Trompenaars place emphasis on the relationship between people while last two anchors in management of time and the relationship between a culture with nature. The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness commonly known as the GLOBE Study also attempted to categories national cultures along different dimensions. It takes into account some of Hofsetede’s dimensions such as the power distance and individualisms versus collectivism dimensions.at the same time has new models such as the gender egalitarianism and performance orientation.
It can be concluded that the variations in cultures have a role to play in the mindset of different people across the world. These variations determine the different outlooks on life hence Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are still valid in today’s business environment through flawed. The cultural dimensions, however, are not a representation of every individual since not every individual adheres to these categories.
References
Hofstede, G., Hofstede G.J., Minkov, M. 2010. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. 3rd Edition. McGraw-Hill.
Trompenaars, F. & Hampden-Turner, C. 1997. Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishers.
Spencer-Oatey, H. & Franklin, P. 2009. Intercultural Interaction: A multidisciplinary approach to intercultural communication. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hofstede, G. (2011) Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1).
Martin, S. 2016. Internationalising corporate leadership competencies through ‘behavioural diversity’. Journal of Competency and Emotional Intelligence, 13(3), pp.28-34.
KPMG Mergers and Acquisitions Global Research Report 2001. Unlocking Shareholder Value: The Keys to Success
Gerstner, L. 2003. Who Says Elephants Can’t Dance? Harper Collins. Chapter 20:
Other Frameworks for Describing Dimensions of Culture
Schneider, S. C. 2006. National vs. corporate culture: Implications for human resource management. Hum. Resour. Manage., 27: 231–246.
Gelfand, M.J., Leslie, L.M., and Keller, K.M. (2008) On the etiology of conflict cultures. Research in Organizational Behavior 28, pp. 137-166.
Section Two Cultural Differences in Cross-Border Business Development Introduction
Cultural differences have huge influence on the Post-Merger-Integration of international joint ventures. PMI has three phases: start-up phase, which is established before the actual merger, for instance defining PMI background colour; project implementation phase, which entails execution of PMI projects; and the present case, which involves integration of organizational culture (Julia & Beuron 2011). According to Schein (2016), integration of cultures is the main challenge to the merger of equals. In this context, organizations have to integrate, blend their cultures, and develop a new common culture. Integration of culture involves three stages: “shock, stress, and willingness to solve problem. The three stages require high degree of patience. During the inception of integration, employees are stunned over the announcement of merger. The shock may spawn internal rivalry among employees to an extent that it hampers integration. Due to the intense stress, employees with higher qualifications may leave the company. The remaining can settle their differences and enter integration process. For the integration process to be effective, it should be transparent considers each party’s interests. This paper explores how cultural differences contributed to failure of Daimler-Benz and Sony Ericson merger.
Daimler-Benz Merger Failure
Daimler-Benz is a German car manufacturer founded in 1926 after “Benz & Cie. Rheinische Gasmotorenfabrik and the Daimler-Motoren-Gesellschaft merged” (Julia, H., & Beuron 2011, p:90). Since its establishment, Daimler-Benz was performing exceptionally well particularly in the German and European automobile industry. Nevertheless, the company could not penetrate the American market due to stiff competition. In fact, Daimler-Benz had less than 1 percent market share in the USA before forging alliance with Chrysler Corporation (Julia et al, 2011).. The former company could not sustain quality production that was so technically intense. On the other hand, Chrysler Corporation was performing well in the USA market with about 23 percent market share (Gru?sgen, Kyriakides, Venizelou, Papadou, & Alexandrou 2011). The latter company had cost-efficient production processes and low cost product development and design procedures.
However, in the early 1990s, the two companies, Chrysler Corporation and Daimler-Benz, were facing serious financial challenges and were at the brink of becoming bankrupt. Some of the threats influenced the situation were rising environmental awareness, overcapacities, and strong position of clients (Gru?sgen et al. 2011, p. 45). Therefore, the two companies merged in 1998 to gain competitive edge over the future. The companies had shared vision of climbing the ladder of efficiency to the apex of the world car manufacturer. Chrysler Corporation and Daimler-Benz consolidate their different operation processes, organizational culture, and expertise to utilize common distribution channels, technologies, and intangible assets. The two C.E.Os from each side ratified the deal as merger of equals. Consequently, Daimler-Chrysler was formed (Bruner, Spekman, Christmann, Kannry, & Davies 2017, p:5).
Impact of National Culture on Individual and Organizational Behavior
To underscore effective integration of organizational cultures during the Daimler-Chrysler merger, several workshops, seminars, and trainings were initiated to familiarize the staff with merger and the integration process and inform the about working with new colleagues who have a different cultural standards. In spite of all the efforts to make integration of cultures work, the process failed and spawned “clash of culture” (Bruner et al., 2017). Clash of culture jeopardized the post integration merger of Daimler-Chrysler. The two organizational cultures were fundamentally different in terms morals and values hence making it harder for managers to harmonize them (Begley and Donnelly 2011). For instance during decision-making, the decision makers from Chrysler side would emphasize on efficiency, equality, and employee welfare while Daimler-Benz would suggest bureaucracy, authority, and centralized decision-making (Guo 2015). On compensation structure, German managers were complaining of hefty generous pay that American managers received. This further worsened the situation. In addition, the American managers had low risk uncertainty avoidance would want to try new methods of doing things while the German managers wanted to follow a detailed process when implementing plans. These differences made Daimler-Chrysler unmanageable.
Sony Ericson Merger Failure
Sony Ericson is an international joint venture that was formed in 2001 by merger of Sony and Ericson (Gru?sgen et al. 2011, p:78). The two companies formed a joint venture in pursuit of gaining competitive advantage in the communication sector by manufacturing mobile phones with more entertaining and appealing features. The head of the Sony Ericson is based in London. This paper dissects the merger by first looking into the reasons that influenced the formation of joint venture, strategies that were employed to implement the venture and why it failed.
In 1946, Sony made debut to the telecommunication market by manufacturing tape recorder as its first hardware device. In 1957, Western Electric also licenced the company to manufacture transistors (Gru?sgen et al. 2011). The company went ahead and made first Trinitron television in 1967 that showed quality pictures. The television design penetrated the global market and generated enormous profits for the firm. Sony is one of the leading Japanese multinational companies and specializes on manufacturing electronic products for both domestic and professional usage. Other products that company has been making include video games, audio, video, and information technology products. Currently, Sony is one of the most prominent brand in the entertainment industry. On the hand, Ericson is a Swedish phone manufacturing company that was established in 1876. The company’s area of specialization has been providing innovative solutions in terms of Mobile and Broadband Internet communication.
Personal Adaptations for Working Across Cultures
According to Gru?sgen et al (2011), the main reason why the two companies formed joint venture was to integrate Ericson technological prowess with Sony’s electronics proficiency. Initially, Phillips was the single the single source supplier of chips to Ericson. Unfortunately, Philips suffered a colossal loss due to large outbreak of fire that destroyed its inventories and consequently incapacitated its operation. The incidence negatively affected Ericson and largely, paralysed its operation. Fortuitously, it merged with Sony to improve gain competitive edge over rivals. The vision of Sony Ericson was “to become the communication entertainment brand, by inspiring people to do more than just communicate, and enabling everyone to create and participate in entertainment experiences (Gru?sgen et al. 2011, p.67)
When the joint venture was formed in 2001, the two companies aimed at providing expertise to dominate the telecommunication market by manufacturing Sony Ericson mobile phones (Steger 2011). Sony did not have much influence in the mobile manufacturing industry and in fact, had less than one percent market share in the market. On the other hand, Ericson was performing exceptionally well in the industry— was the third in terms of market share. Due to the unfortunate occurrence at Philips, it was only appropriate that the two companies merge.
According to Steger (2011), the main driver of joint venture is the “Transaction Cost Economics,” since the cost of sole ownership transcends that of joint ownership. It is for this reason that Sony found it propitious to sign the deal with Ericson, to gain competitive edge in the mobile industry while Ericson needed to save itself from collapsing. Another factor that influenced Sony was the fact that it was going to benefit from the Ericson’s vital intangible resources, which would enable the company to improve its performance in the mobile phone manufacturing industry (Abesi 2016. P: 6). The organizational learning and strategic management also motivated the two companies since they wanted to utilize each one’s unique skills.
After formation of the alliance, the two companies ceased manufacturing their separate cell phones and began working together. Sony Ericson designed a strategy to make new models that had had digital cameras and could be able to download videos. The main innovation was cheap camera mobile phones and cross platform operating system.
However, the joint venture could not conjure up profits as expected. Sony Ericson made losses due to misrepresentation of the product in the market, an aspect that was believed to have occurred due to cultural differences that has direct effect on choice. According to Gru?sgen et al (2011), the products did not essentially meet the consumer’s expectations. The author attributes this failure to deficient research and development techniques towards different cultural aspects that affects the performance of the organzation. In addition, the companies were unable to establish the reason for the loss. The joint venture failed due to their failure to develop strong customer base products. Consequently, customers switched to their competitive products. While they were developing innovative products, marketing strategy was not effectual; hence, they could not attract buyers. Joint venture can be successful if the organization has a clear vision to guide its operations (Gru?sgen et al. 2011, p. 89). Sony Ericson could not meet the target profits and kept making losses. In addition, Ericson did meet up to Sony’s expectations: Sony was expecting quick generation of profits.
Conclusion
Conclusion
In conclusion, cross-border merger is not a simple process particularly when it is merger of equals. The main threat to cross-cultural merger is failure to integrate culture and form a harmonized organizational ethics. Besides financial and technical background search, the feasibility study should incorporate cultural aspects before any international venture to evaluate the realism of proceeding with the merger.
References
Abesi, S. (2016). The Effect of Brand Names Union on the Profitability of Institutions, Case Study: Sony Ericson Mobile Phone. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. doi:10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n3s3p306
Begley, J., & Donnelly, T. (2011). The DaimlerChrysler Mitsubishi merger: a study in failure. International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, 11(1), 36. doi:10.1504/ijatm.2011.038120
Bruner, R. F., Spekman, R. E., Christmann, P., Kannry, B., & Davies, M. (2017). Daimler-Benz A.G.: Negotiations between Daimler and Chrysler. Darden Business Publishing Cases, 1(1), 1-45. doi:10.1108/case.darden.2016.000082
Gru?sgen, S., Kyriakides, S., Venizelou, C., Papadou, M., & Alexandrou, C. (2011). Mergers & Acquisitions – Success or Failure?: The Role of Corporate Governance and Strategic Management in Mergers and Acquisitions with the examples of DaimlerChrysler and Sony Ericsson. Munich: GRIN Verlag GmbH.
Guo, R. B. (2015). Managing Cross-Cultural Differences. Cross-Border Management, 381-399. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-45156-4_18
Julia, H., & Beuron, T. A. (2011). The DaimlerChrysler merger – a cultural mismatch?
Schein, E. H. (2016). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). Wiley;.
Steger, I. (2011, October 27). Sony and Ericsson Call It Quits, Finally.
Section Three Individual Behavior and Success in Cross-Border Business Development
Soto and Deemer (2018) denote that we are in the ever-changing global environment, full of technologies that make nearly all business to deal with clients from all over the world. These clients have diverse cultural practices calls for a change in the individual behavior of executives /managers to improve the chances of success in cross-border business development. This calls for executives, managers or technicians to think outside the box if they want to secure a chance to be successful. A clear understanding of national culture is rudimentary in this context to facilitate flourishing of any business in the competitive market arena.
There are individual behaviors that a manager can develop to ensure continuity and effectiveness in a cross-cultural environment. Managers of any company or business need to understand the fact that clients or co-workers have cultural requirements like praying time or religious holidays and try to fix them into their work plan. This involves having an open mind and accepting the fact that your way is not the only way diversity can be initiated by trying to find common ground where everyone in the organization can understand each other and respect and embrace cultural differences. This implies that acquisition of cross-cultural leadership skills will enable the manager to leverage diversity in the workplace thus enhancing the chances of success in the organization
Furthermore, Jackson, Niculescu, and Jackson (2013) denote that senior executives can also adapt to this situation by trying to learn their client’s culture. The objective can be achieved by allocating some time for research and inquiry about other people’s culture, an aspect that goes a long way to make the stakeholders or those you are working with to feel comfortable.
Knowing the things your clients and customers want and like/value customers’ protocol, business practices and what they do for fun makes your colleagues feel appreciated and thus will be more apt to recommend you do business with them in future. Encouraging the appreciation of cultural difference such as having cultural days in the organization where all people display and share aspects of their culture with everyone creates a conducive environment for socialization and increases the reputation of the organization thus attracting the possibilities for success rather than failure.
Being open to trying learning new things and a new phrase is a vital aspect (Balkar 2014, p. 81). Making efforts to try your client’s food or way of dressing in their country will course them to appreciate you for making an effort. If you cannot compromise your principles in their group, then you as a manager, you can decline the idea respectfully. This helps the competent managers to build a bridge and open door cultural diversity in the organization. The key to any success in business is the ability to communicate effectively because clear communication is essential for effective functioning,
it is necessary as a manager to encourage your employees to understand what your clients and customers need. This can be facilitated by learning a few greetings, and some essential phrases. Providing cross-cultural training to your employees to deal with your clients more efficiently especially in a specific culture is also necessary.
Understanding how to adapt to different business contexts especially cross-cultural business is essential for the success of any business according to Ruirong, and Yi (2016). Adapting to this situation calls for all business executive to have a clear view of the differences that exist between different nations or culture. According to Balkar (2014), one has to have understanding of several things such as; power distance index (degree of inequalities that exist in that nation). It implies that the leader has to organize the structure of the organization depending on the belief system of the region, for instance, some countries like China believe that something is more important when close supervision is paid to works thus it will be given the seriousness that it deserves. As an executive
Adopting similarities has a positive effect on building mutual trust and improving the attractiveness and a positive evaluation of the organization. Cultural and intercultural competence is an effective way of taking over competing opponents in the market (Butt & Palmer 2014: 280). The executive has to build his knowledge about the business culture of his clients.
This may also involve knowing the value index of individualism versus collectivism (strength of ties that people have to each other within the community, for instance, collective society taking charge of the situation). It also involves uncertainty avoidance index high versus low (how well people can cope with anxiety that is, readiness of people to take collective risk for the success of the business to prevail), masculinity versus femininity (distribution of role between men and women assertively behavior if whether modesty is perceived as a virtue. Merging through discussion, consensus building compromise and negotiation) and promotive verses normative / indulgence verse restrain. This determines the degree to which people need to explain the inexplicable religiosity and nationalism in addition to gratification/fun the social norms that exist in the nation.
When the executive or manager is competent in this area, Mo and Shi (2016)h denote that leaders have a high chance of getting success as he will be in a position to deal with the stakeholders (clients, employees, and sponsors) putting in mind their beliefs and practices. Ability to consider change as normal, positive and a source of opportunity by relying on creative outsider thinking and developing adaptation to reinvent themselves to experience with new identities in the new setting to be able to take risks that lead to self-efficacy as has been demonstrated by Ferreira (2017).
There are common cases in the development of different cultural worldviews such as having a positive attitude towards cultural differences and having the knowledge of different cultural practices. Cases have also been evident on the ability to understand and communicate with people whose background is different from ours, aspects that help build cultural competence that will propagate success of their business.
In addition to this kind of competence, Game and Crawshaw (2017) denote that managers dealing with organizations that have workers or clients with different background can see their chances of success by checking their attitude towards authority as it is one of the most striking points of difference across culture. Getting an open view of the norms of the society, they are situated by understanding the dynamics of diverse groups and teams, accessing their cultural conditioning and imparting on the decisions and actions undertaken. This goes a long way to help them to understand the relationship of cultural diversity and team performance thus knowing how to control and interact with your colleagues and clients.
Competency denotes demonstrated skills starting with a case study and putting into practice by taking them into the real world (Ferreira 2017). Thus, for any business that deals with people from different cultures, has to consider competency in all areas as it is the most basic way to succeed in international or national business endeavors.
Conclusion
To sum up, competence is the key to success in any multicultural business in the world. As an executive or manager to any given business, developing individual behaviors such as accommodation, being open to trying new ideas and developing competence in all aspects of the culture of your people builds chances to succeed. This can be fostered by having clear knowledge about the cultural dimension. This involves knowing power distance index of that nation, individualism versus collectivism, masculinity versus femininity, uncertainty avoidance index and pragmatic verse normative aspects of that nation
List of References
Butt, A, & Palmer, I 2014, ‘Societal-Level Versus Individual-Level Predictions of Ethical Behavior: A 48-Society Study of Collectivism and Individualism, 122, 2, pp. 283-306, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), EBSCOhost, viewed 24 April 2018.
Ferreira, M 2017, ‘The Relationship Between Social Cynicism Belief, Social Dominance Orientation, and the Perception of Unethical Behavior: A Cross-Cultural Examination in Russia, Portugal, and the United States’, Journal Of Business Ethics, 146, 3, pp. 545-562.
Game, A, & Crawshaw, J 2017, ‘A Question of Fit: Cultural and Individual Differences in Interpersonal Justice Perceptions’, Journal Of Business Ethics, 144, 2, pp. 279-291, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), EBSCOhost, viewed 24 April 2018.
Mo, S, & Shi, J 2017, ‘Linking Ethical Leadership to Employees’ Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Testing the Multilevel Mediation Role of Organizational Concern’, Journal Of Business Ethics, 141, 1, pp. 151-162, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), EBSCOhost, viewed 24 April 2018.
Ruirong, M, & Yi, L 2016, ‘Social Support: A Moderator between Cultural Intelligence and Crosscultural Adaptation of International Students in Chinese Universities’, International Forum Of Teaching & Studies, 12, 2, pp. 32-36
Schein, E. H. 2016. Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). Wiley;.
Schneider, S. C. 2006. National vs. corporate culture: Implications for human resource management. Hum. Resour. Manage. 27: 231–246.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
