Hofstede's Cultural Indices In Relief, Development, And Social Justice Work

The IBM study of employees from the 70 countries was the basis for the dimensions and has been critized since there was only one company in the data set however, Hofstede’s belief was that using just one company would better reveal the national differences. According to the authors Phatak, Bhagat, and Kashalk (2009), he believed this because the IBM employees were the same in other respects like type of work, job descriptions, and education. This study has been stated to be the most comprehensive study of how values are influenced in the workplace (Itim International, 2012). Itim International, (2012) noted that Hofstede’s work established a paradigm in international economics, communication, and cooperation, from which Hofstede developed the first emphirical model of “dimensions” for national organizational culutre.

The United States of America is infamous for being a melting pot of different cultures and ethnicities. The diversity in America is great and in theory is an amazing asset to this nation. However, as a society we tend to allow our differences to segregate us and alienate those who are different. By not embracing the diversity among us, many complications are created. For instance, as a result of an inability to respect other cultures, prejudice, discrimination, and tragic violence often occur. People begin to fight with others for the sole reason that they do not hold all the same beliefs. Also, as a result of the difficulties associated with poor acceptance of cultural diversity, communication becomes muddled and misunderstandings become prevalent, creating a society where different peoples are unable to communicate with each other affectively. The way to combat these problems lies in cultural competency. Cultural competency is an understanding that everyone is different while also encouraging respect and tolerance of these varying cultures. As exemplified by the nursing profession, cultural competency benefits all and has the potential to create a more just society for the common good. In nursing, an intolerance of different peoples can mean the difference between survival and death, just as it can for greater society, both literally and figuratively. As encapsulated by the nursing profession, an application of cultural competency creates a society where our

Hofstede conducted a study on how values in the work environment, are impacted by employee culture. He defined culture as “the collective programming of the mind distinguishing the members of one group or category of people from others.”

Understanding the differences and similarities inherent in other cultures may provide opportunities when working with individuals (or groups) who may have different cultural values, beliefs, and/or norms. There are multiple ways to explore different cultures. One way is through Hofstede’s (2017) cultural dimension; which are currently made up of six broad categories, including high-low power distance, individualism-collectivism, masculinity-femininity, uncertainty avoidance, long-short term orientation, and indulgence-restraint. It is beyond the scope of this paper to explore all these cultural dimensions in great detail; however, it is important to understand some of the implications of these scores. The scores for both the US and China can be seen in Table 1, along with the differences between each score.

When a business decides to venture internationally into different countries with its products, services, and operations, it is very important that the company gains an understanding of how the culture of the different societies affects the values found in those societies. Geert Hofstede conducted one of the most famous and most used studies on how culture relates to values. Hofstede study enabled him to compare dimensions of culture across 40 countries. He originally isolated four dimensions of what he claimed summarized different cultures — power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism versus collectivism, and masculinity versus femininity (Hill, 2013, p.110). To cover aspects of values not discussed in the original paradigm Hofstede has since added two more dimensions — Confucianism or long-term orientation and indulgence versus self-restraint (Hofstede, n.d.). Because of the way Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are given an index score from 0-100, it is easy for a company to get a general comparison between the cultures they are expanding into and the culture they are already in.

Due to cultural differences, work-related values and attitudes among employees in each corporations are dissimilar. Using Hofstede’s work on cultural dimensions and looking at the American Publix and Spanish Mercadona through the four dimensions of difference, these dissimilarities become apparent. The five dimensions observed are individualism and collectivism (IDV), power distance (PDI), uncertainty avoidance (UAI), career success and quality of life (MAS), and rules and relationships (LTO). Each dimension is scored on a number scale of up to one hundred.

Geert Hofstede developed a model which seeks to understand how values in the work place are influenced by culture. He started this study by looking at IBM operations between 1967 and 1973. Data was culled out from 50 different countries which were then extrapolated to 74 nations (the original 50 plus an additional 24).

The second Hofstede cultural dimension compared is “Individualism vs. Collectivism” which indicates whether members within a society define themselves as individuals or associate themselves with a particular group. In Hofstede’s comparison of Japanese and American cultures, American culture scored relatively high (91) in the individualism dimension. On the contrary, the Japanese culture scored relatively low (46) which firmly categorizes the culture as Collectivist. To clarify, Americans places self over group (Individualist), whereas the Japanese value group over self (Collectivist). As it relates to Snap Fitness’s desire to open fitness clubs in Japan, group think may lend itself to two very lucrative aspects of the business. First, a collectivist culture should stimulate Snap Fitness’s efforts to promote and sell corporate memberships which represent a significant revenue contribution in the 24/7 fitness business model. The second benefit collectivism should offer is an increase in the sales of group classes which is another notable source of club revenue.

A wise Professor named Geert Hofstede established one of the best studies that put into account a countries culture and how values in the workplace can affect them. Today I will look at a particular country that is quite similar to the United States. The country I have chosen is the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom encompasses England, Wales, and Scotland (which combined make up Great Britain) and Northern Ireland. Before looking at how United Kingdom numbers there first needs to be a description of what is in fact being numbered. Hofstede created five cultural dimensions. In each dimension whether it marked high or low can help a business

On the Hofstede’s scale, American score 91% against the 48% of the Indian people. American people and especially their hierarchy is based on high-individualism, because each one is working for their personal success, without caring for group works. Indians are scoring almost the 50%, which means that they are caring for their personal success, but they are also strong team-players. This Hofstede’s scale can also get connected with GLOBE’s Assertiveness scale in which Americans score 65% and Indian people

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:

As a social worker we are to assess clients with our social work toolkit, which consists of knowledge, skills, and values. This toolkit is important because they are inextricably linked with cultural competency. Knowledge is important because it teaches you how to assess your client based on the information that is provided to you from the client. In social work, we know that theory is the foundation of our basis and knowledge. Theory is our support and what we use in order to support our cases. Knowledge of social work works together with our skills and having the practice to help clients deal with their problems. Skills help us know what treatment works best for whom, and what recommendations we can make to our clients. Our client base is not going to be the same. Because diversity is so common, you can have clients who are the same race/ethnicity but completely different in lifestyle and cultural experiences. On the micro level of diversity, we would look at the individual. How does this individual identify oneself? The micro level would assess what culture does the client best identify with? How does the client identify oneself with the rest of the population? Another aspect would be how does the social worker apply in this aspect? According to the textbook, social workers

Culture in its many forms and approaches is a very popular subject researched by many authors. The definition of culture from Geert Hofstede, the most cited social scientist according to Powell (2006) comes as "the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of humans from another". (1982) He mentions that these differences exist in nations, geographic regions, generations, genders, social classes and many more. As Hofstede simply puts it, "the unwritten rules of

Dr. Hofstede performed a comprehensive study of how values in the workplace are influenced by culture. In the 1970’s, as a Dutch researcher Dr. Geert Hofstede, collected and analyzed data from 116,000 surveys taken from IBM employees in forty different countries around the world. From those results, Hofstede developed a model that identifies four primary dimensions of differentiate cultures. These include: Uncertainty Avoidance (UA), Masculinity-Femininity (MAS), Individualism-Collectivism (IND), Power and Distance (PD). After a further study of the Asian culture by researcher Michael Bond in 1991, Hofstede added a fifth dimension in his theory, Long- and Short-term time orientation (LTO), also referred to as the Confucian Dynamism. His research has framed how cultural differences can be used in professional business transactions. Geert Hofstede 's dimensions analysis can assist the business person in better understanding the intercultural differences within regions and between countries.

Although research into culture has been limited, compared to studies of other contextual variables, it remains relevant. Hopwood (1986, in Fauzi & Hussain 2008) stressed the importance of culture in MCS design with social control and Simons (2000, in Fauzi & Hussain 2008) with boundary system, which plays a negative, limiting role for company’s new opportunities. The basic view is that culture will impact the development and effectiveness of MCS (Chenhall 2003). The most frequently used culture classifications are the ones by Hofstede (1984, in Chenhall 2003) including following dimensions: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and individualism and collectivism. However, these results in some limitations: a study using only Hofstede values may omit other relevant values; the values assigned by Hofstede may not be applicable to the country due to education and globalisation. What is more, such values may not apply equally to all individuals within a culture.