A Research Carried Out By Geert Hofstede And His Colleagues, Identifying Study Procedures And Overall Outcomes

He believed that, (1) Values dimensions of Chinese regional cultures were significantly different based on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory, (2) Among Chinese regional cultures, there were indeed an existence of cross-cultural differences in some aspects.

The greatest diversion in cultural values between eastern and western nations can be observed through the mentality that shapes social behaviors in terms of relationships and in response to goals. The Hofstede dimension which best represents this aspect of society is the Individualism versus Collectivism index. This dimension refers to the degree of interdependence among the members in a particular society.

The United States and China boast the two largest economies in the world but, despite this fact, these two countries have very little in common. At first glance, this may seem very obvious to most people but, what exactly is it that makes these two countries so different? How is it that such different perspectives and approaches can both lead to great success? Hofstede’s six dimensions of culture are an attempt to answer these questions and more. Dr. Geert Hofstede, studied employees of the computer firm IBM in over fifty different countries. When he examined his findings he found “clear patterns of similarity and difference along the four dimensions” (Manktelow, Jackson Edwards, Eyre, Cook and Khan, n.d.). The fact that he focused his research on solely IBM employees allowed him to eliminate company culture as a differentiating factor and “attribute those patterns to national and social differences” (n.d.). He used his findings to originally identify four dimensions, later expanded to six, that could “distinguish one culture from another” (n.d.). The six dimensions all on a scale from 0 to 100 are:

In the field of cross-cultural studies, Geert Hofstede’s Dimensions of Cultural Values framework is widely recognised and greatly employed in cultural assessment (Bing 2004, Michael and College 1997). Using data extracted from the IBM international workforce in the 1960s, he identified four dimensions of culture (power distance (PD), uncertainty avoidance (UA), individualism/collectivism and masculinity/femininity) and later included the dimension of short-term orientation (STO) /long-term orientation (LTO) into the mix (Magnusson, Wilson, Zdravkovic, Zhou and Westjohn 2008). According to Hofstede (1993), by evaluating these dimensions, one would be able to determine a nation’s culture and act accordingly to the results.

This paper serves a purpose of examining the Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions and using such measurement to compare the cultural values of Canada and the United States. It will look deeper into the cultural dimensions, business practices and business etiquette. This paper will also provide information of both countries and where they stand on the dimensions and the reason why. Hofstede decided that when two people interact with each other within an organization, culture characterizes their behavior and attitude towards others. Psychology Hofstede had published his cultural dimension’s model at the end of the 1970s. In more than fifty countries Hofstede studied the people that worked for IBM. The dimensions collectively portray the impact of the culture in the society on the values of the members of the society. The description of the relationship between the values and the behavior based on the factor of analysis.

members of one group or category of people from another”. Distinguishing and characterizing cultural diimensions and exploring the implications of national cultural differences have turned out to be profound and provocative. The common point of cultural understanding has been given by Grret Hofstede (1980) since years. His work has been expanded by GLOBE study to give a more detailed explanation of National Culture.

The complete description of the cultural dimensions can be found on the website (Hofstede, 2011). The four main dimensions according to Hofstede are: • Power Distance Index (PDI): the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. Individualism (IDV): the degree to which individuals are integrated into groups.

What do you understand by the term ‘national culture’? And why do you think that French (2010:44) argues that ‘Culture remains a core concept both for students of business and managers in work organisations’?

It is important for the companies to understand what culture actually means, Hofstede (1984), defines culture as “collective mind programming which differentiate one group from another culture through set of values”. So these values and fundamental assumptions held by a group of individuals are manifested into people’s attitudes and behaviors. Thus, culture difference can lead individual to view similar things in quite different ways.

’Culture is the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another.’- Hofstede

Globe Project, ends up with nine key cultural dimensions: Assertiveness, future orientation, gender differentiation, uncertainty avoidance, power distance, institutional collectivism, in group collectivism, performance orientation, and humane orientation (Rumg, 2008).

Small vs. Large Power Distance: The first dimension indicates the extent to which a society can dominate, to what extent a society can exploit and the unequal distribution of power. The extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. Small power distance (e.g. Austria, Denmark) expect and accept power relations that are more consultative or democratic. People relate to one another more as equals regardless of formal positions. Subordinates are more comfortable with and demand the right to contribute to and critique the decision making of those in higher positions. In large power distance countries

Based on Hofstede’s (1993) definition of national culture, it is stated that national culture is the software of the mind, and it is deeply embedded in everyday life and fairly resistant to change. Moreover, it is confirmed that national culture has a significant relationship with HR policies and practice (Hofstede, 1993). Also, Earley (1994) demonstrated that national cultural values that reinforce HR are more likely to yield predictable behaviour and better performances. This is because a national culture is usually characterized by the values of the people who belong to that culture, so well HR practices are consistent with existing behaviour expectations and routines that transcend the workplace. Employees are not distracted from work if HR practices are consistent with national cultural value. The various values had been grouped, by Schuler and Jackson (1994), into four categories, work goal importance, need deficiency, fulfillment, and job satisfaction, managerial and organizational variables, and work role and interpersonal orientation. Furthermore, Hofstede (1993) has presented four largely independent dimensions of differences among national values systems, which were labeled "Power Distance", "Uncertainty Avoidance," "Individualism vs. Collectivism," and "Masculinity vs. Femininity."

'Culture is the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one category of people from another.' (Hofstede, 1991)

Hofstede’s Power distance Index measures the extent to which the less powerful members of organisations accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. Australia has a 36 on the cultural scale of Hofstede’s analysis and Peru has 64. Australia has almost equal distribution among rich and poor as compared to Peru.