The Impact Of Cultural Dimensions On Nation 's Growth Of Service Innovation Essay

Goods and services are both areas of operations, this means that they will change the state of any input into output. In order to achieve this they will need to have a transformation process according to the type of service or goods they have to offer this is all part of satisfying customer needs.

The new service economy has positive and negative aspects. The United States labor was once based on agriculture, then manufacturing and has now turned into an economy based on services (Hodson & Sullivan, 2008). Over the years, Americans have gained more capital and with that capital services such as education, health and entertainment have increased. (Worldbank, n.d.) Because service jobs are not based on the use of machines like manufacturing, jobs are continuing to grow in the

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 shift towards a service-oriented business environment in the UK has been influenced by several economic, ideological and political changes that took place during the 1980s and the 1990s.

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

There has to be an understanding of the complexity of services before one can begin to determine what challenges face the service industry and the most efficient means of facing those challenges to maintain success. A service organization provides intangible services for a monetary value as perceived by the consumer (Lovelock & Wirtz, 2011). A simple definition is that there are no physical items exchanged in a service transaction as opposed to retail where an item is given in exchange for a predetermined price point. This paper will provide

U.S. American culture differs greatly from many other cultures in its strong emphasis on individualism and task orientation. This leads to business behaviors that are challenging for may other cultures, even when they think they understand U.S. culture from T.V. and other media.

Analysing it in depth, several theories exist but this essay is going to concentrate in two main frameworks that suppose a point of inflexion in the study of the culture in the business: Hall’s Model, which is focus in the meaning of context for the culture and time orientations and Hofstede 's Model, which develop a five dimensional scheme to establish cultural comparisons between nations.

The Organisational Cultural Model helps you to categorise organisational cultures in a handy and operational way. Consisting of six autonomous dimensions or variables and two semi-autonomous dimensions. Geert's research has shown that organizational cultures differ at six different levels - Means-oriented vs. Goal-oriented , Internally driven vs. Externally driven

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.

Geert Hofstede is an influential Dutch researcher in the fields of organizational studies and more concretely organizational culture, also cultural economics and management. He is a well-known pioneer in his research of cross-cultural groups and organizations and played a major role in developing a systematic framework for assessing and differentiating national cultures and organizational cultures. His studies demonstrated that there are national and regional cultural groups that influence behavior of societies and organizations.

There are four major culture types within an organization, namely the Clan, Adhocracy, Hierarchy and the Market (Kim & Quinn, 1999). These four cultures are translated into a model, named the Competing Values Framework. This framework shows the cultures, organized between two dimensions. The framework shows which culture coincides with which dimension, to show the effectiveness of the organization and the organizational culture.

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.

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:

Understanding the influence of culture in business practices and managerial decision-making requires explaining the differences between cultures. This is why, Hofstede (appendix 1) presents a well-known model based on four dimensions of culture: