Leadership And Hofstede 's Six Dimensions

1156 Words5 Pages
Leadership and Hofstede 's Six Dimensions Maneuvering through the sea of cultural differences in the workplace in today’s business can be tricky. As companies become more global, and employ people from different cultures, leaders must learn to adapt to differences among these cultures if they wish to succeed. Leading the same across cultures may not have positive outcomes. In this writing, I will discuss Hofstede’s six cultural dimensions and how they relate to leadership. I will then explain what combinations of these dimensions, I feel, make the most effective leader. First, let’s discuss the six dimensions of leadership. Six Dimensions and Leadership Between 1967 and 1973, IBM collected data of employee value scores. (Hofstede,…show more content…
Participative leadership style would be used in this case, giving followers the ability to be a part of decision making. Individualism Versus Collectivism (IDV) This dimension measures how “tight or loose-knit” the “social framework” is among people. (Hofstede, 2001, para. 5). Countries that measure on the higher side of this scale have more “individualism,” meaning they look out for themselves and their immediate families. On the opposite end of this scale, collectivism; people look at the better good of the group keeping all interests in mind. The leadership for individualism is based more on one-on-one types of interactions, focusing on strengths of the individual. (Ori, n.d.). In a collectivism environment, the leader will focus on the betterment of the group, possibly utilizing a laissez-faire style of leadership. Masculinity Versus Femininity (MAS) In the MAS dimension, societies that are high in masculinity focus more on achievements and are more competitive. On opposite end of this dimension, society is focused more on caring for each other, worried more about the quality of life. The leadership style for a high masculinity dimension would be procedural, being more task orientated vs relationship based. ("Sides of Leadership," 2005). The style for a low masculinity or feminine side would be more of a “democratic,” or even transformational,
Open Document