Leadership And Hofstede 's Six Dimensions

"Power distance" is among one of five cultural methods that were found by Hofstede. It’s the degree to which the less powerful group of people in an establishment and organizations agree to anticipate that power is distributed unequally. In other words, some cultures agree to receive a higher degree of unequally distributed power than what other peoples of other cultures. In America we are considered to be low power distance because society feels that they are entitled to a certain amount of power. In other countries they practice or have a higher power distance because people feel they are given little power or none due to people that have much higher positions. Some peoples from different culture’s that have a low power distance assume and

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.

Hofstede defined the culture as “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group from that another”. His five types of cultural dimensions are the most popular in many cultural area studies, include: (1) power distance; (2) individualism vs. collectivism; (3) uncertainty avoidance; (4) masculinity vs. femininity; and (5) long-term vs. short-term orientation. These dimensions offer an insight towards behaviors and standards in the cultural context which are useful for many motivators to explore the people in different culture. The text suggested that countries with high uncertainty avoidance will lead to more job security, whereas people with low uncertainty avoidance (for example, U.S.) are motivated by new ideas and innovation. People with high power distance are motivated by relationships between subordinates and their boss, while people with low power distance are motivated by team work and relationships with their peers. On the other hand, individuals from high individualism are motivated by opportunities and autonomy; collectivism (for example, Japan) suggests that motivation should be done with group goals and support. Individuals from high masculine culture are comfortable with the tradition and division of works and roles; in a feminine culture, the motivators help people through flexible roles and work

In addition to power established because of organizational hierarchy or role, power is also established based on the level of influence or status one holds in an organization (Anichich, Fast, Halevy, Galinsky, 2016). “Status is the outcome of an evaluation of attributes that produce differences in respect and prominence” (Ketner et al, 2003 p. 266) They co-exists but are not co-dependent on each other. It’s possible to have status without power and power without status (Ketner et al, 2003). Whether one’s control comes through status or positional power, lauding control or significant influence over another inevitably leads to conflict.

Power Distance: In western cultures hierarchy is established for convenience, where superiors are always accessible and managers are able to rely on employees and teams for their expertise. Consultation is expected for both managers and employees and information to be shared on regular basis. Communication is often informal, direct and participative.

Power distance is the value placed on hierarchies within culture and business (Javidan, 2006, p.70). Countries with a high power distance may be caste societies and are reflective of “unequal power distribution within” (Javidan, 2006, p. 70). Those which place a low value on power distance do not believe that power distributed to the top of the hierarchy is essential or beneficial (Javidan, 2006, p.70). All five countries ranked power distance as moderately important reflecting their belief that power distance is of median impotence to leadership effectiveness (Appendix A). Even though this characteristic is equally valued in all five countries the leader cannot use the same approach to power distance everywhere. This is because power distance may be defined differently in each country. Thus the American will still need to develop this characteristic

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.

To show how culture influences the values that exist in the workplace, Geert Hofstede, a Dutch social psychologist and international management professor at

Related to leadership. Power Distance relates to leadership in how employees view their leadership structure (de Mooij & Hofstede, 2010). In a high scoring PD culture, a clear social status of the leader is very important, so that employees can show proper respect (de Mooij & Hofstede, 2010). Low Power Distance scores indicate less tolerance of unequal distribution of power, and in turn employees will not put as much stock in the social status of their leader, but how accessible that leader is for collaboration (de Mooij & Hofstede, 2010).

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.

| * India scores high on this dimension, 77, indicating an appreciation for hierarchy and a Top – Down Structure in society and Organizations. dependent on the boss or the powerholder for direction, acceptance of un-equal rights between the power-priviledged and those who are lesser down in the pecking order, immediate superiors accessible but one layer above less so, paternalistic leader, management directs, gives reason / meaning to ones work life and rewards in exchange for loyalty from employees. * Real Power is centralized even though it may not appear to be and managers count on the obedience of their team members. * Employees expect to be directed clearly as to their functions and what is expected of them. * Communication is top down and directive in its style and often feedback which is negative is never offered up the ladder

Professor Hofstede has studies that show how values in the workplace are influenced by culture. Today’s leaders often encounter employees and peers that come from different cultures. Looking into these studies helps find valuable information that can be used for effective leadership. Recognizing, accepting, and altering leadership styles based on these differences will make everyone’s job easier and mostly importantly the company will thrive.

Geert Hofstede is a Dutch social psychologist who studied interactions between various cultures. One of his most important and notable accomplishments has been the Cultural Dimensions theory which provides a systematic framework for analysing and assessing the differences between cultures from different geographic areas.

By 2010 the model was completed after a final two more dimensions were added, named pragmatism and indulgence. The research carried out was conducted by Michael Minkov, who studied modern World Values Survey data taken from population samples nationally. Author Robert R.McCrae supports Hofstede’s dimensions by believing that they ‘represent a well-validated operationalization of differences between cultures as manifested in dominant value systems’ (McCrae, 2004). However, as studied on the Geert Hofstede website, only 6 dimensions are needed and necessary in defining culture attributes, resulting in pragmatism being dropped because of overlapping of meanings with long-term orientation.

A Dutch social psychologist and anthropologist named Geert Hofstede studied how different cultures interact with one another. The framework for assessing the many differences between nations and cultures was established by him and called the cultural dimensions theory. The theory uses six cultural dimensions to place a value on them. The six cultural dimensions are power, collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity, temporal orientation, and indulgence. The data Hofstede gathered was based on surveys conducted by IBM, a US technology and consulting firm (Cultural, 2013).