Cultural Dimensions: Individualism vs. Collectivism - Report Example

Cultural Dimensions Name Course number University Date National culture is characterized by the things ones from their day to day lives. National culture may influence the culture of the organisations in different countries. Culture in organisations is seen as a continuation of the behaviour people learnt earlier in their lives. Culture can also be said to be a set of behaviours as they are shared and accepted in a particular group of people (Hofstede, 1984). These behaviours are practiced everyday by the given group of people. These are the same people employed by organisations and this is taken as the organisation culture. The culture of a society or that of an organisation is determined by various factors (Abdullah, 1996). National culture is highly embedded in which an individual acquires while and in their process of growing. These are the values which have helped in shaping the way people act (Abdullah, 1992). The reason behind this is that the cultural values learnt at early stages of life mould the future behaviours of an individual. Therefore, national culture at its dimension may influence organisations culture and the way they act. Cultural influence in an organisation maybe determined by practices such as communication in an organisation, which is the way people interact with their fellow employees at their places of work (Hofstede, 1984). These practices differ with countries. Communication is seen as a very important part of running an organisation and leading it to success. The other functions of an organisation revolve around communication because it is the driving factor to understanding the cultural influence in the global organisations. According Hofstede there are five dimensions of culture which include power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism vs. collectivism, femininity vs. masculinity and long term and short term orientation. These dimensions explain the ways in which culture influences the way organisations are managed in carrying out their day to day activities. The influence of culture on global organisations is mainly determined by the country under which such organisations operate. This is as a result of international trade and other agreements which have enabled many organisations to operate in different countries (Conrad, 1990). Their cultures have been influenced because they have to engage with the people of the country they are operating in as their employees. The culture of an organisation is highly influenced by the national culture of a given country in which they are operating. There are different levels of culture which include the Meta culture which involves the culture found in the global context through interaction of people originating from different cultures. There is the national culture which is practices and value in a given country. There is also the micro culture which is practiced by a given organisation either in a given country or globally (Ahmad, 2001). Cultural Dimensions Power Distance This dimension categorises the level at which power is spread in an organisation. The dimension measures extent to which power is shared among the employees of an organisation (Fontaine, & Richardson, 2003). The dimension measures the extent at which employees interact with their managers and the freedom of the employees to act against the decisions of their superiors. The dimension looks at the management style of the global organisations, looking at how they encourage the junior staff to disagree with their bosses. In the countries with high levels of power distance inequality in power is accepted for example, in countries like Malaysia, France, Spain and Hong Kong. In these countries obedience and other strong cultural values are taught to children by their parents (Hofstede, 1991). The people in power are highly respected and feared by those under them. The subordinate employees are supposed to obey orders without questioning them. This means that power use in the society is not legitimate and at times this gives rise to autocratic leaders who oppress their subjects. There is a lot of inequality in these countries in a way that rising to power is through hierarchy that gives power to only a few in the society (Hofstede, 2007). The religion in this countries and societies is also hierarchical were priests come from selected families. The wealth in these countries is with a few people because income distribution is uneven in the country (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). Corruption is also very rampant in these countries. Those in power tend to appoint their relatives and friends to power and merits and qualifications are not put into consideration. Change in these countries can only be forced through a revolution. This kind of culture is very influential to the organisations because they tend to take this shape of the society (Kennedy, 2002). The managers in the organisations are seen as superhuman beings and cannot be opposed in their decisions (Lim, 2001). The employees undergo training which is done by the management so as to be able to perform their duties (Manshor, Fontaine, & Chong, 2003). The employees can only wait for instructions from their managers and can only act and obey direct orders from their bosses. The subordinates cannot make decisions in the organisations because this is the role of chosen a few who are highly ranked in the organisations (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005). The high ranking management personnel do not put into consideration the feelings and the views of the subordinates while making decisions that will affect all the employees. The employees do not rise to management positions through merit but through the family and hierarchy created in this organisation. This means that it is very hard for a subordinate employee to rise to management level. In the countries with low levels of power distance the case is very different from those countries with high levels of power distance. The countries with small levels of power distance include Germany, Italy, Great Britain, United States of America and Australia (Newman, & Nollen, 1996). In these countries use of power is seen to be legitimate it is subjected to the criteria of good and evil. The people in the society are seen to be equals and everyone in the society can make a decision. Democracy is the rule of law in these countries because their leaders are voted to office where the majority wins. There is equality in the religion in these countries and there is freedom of worship. National wealth and income are fairly distributed among the citizens. This culture in the countries has influenced the organisations operating in these countries because they have taken the countries culture as their own. The reason behind this is that they employed people from these countries who come with their culture from different parts of the world. This forms the global organisations culture (Redding, 1985). The decision making process in this organisations is consultative where the subordinates have a say on the decisions that the organisations is taking. The employees and the management work as a team so as to produce the best results for the company. The employees are promoted on merit and no employee is favoured during promotions. The process is always fair and there is laid down strategies on how to identify the employees who should be promoted (Triandis, 1993). This process means that ensure that any employ can to rise to the management level. The subordinates in these countries and organisations are free to make decisions that will benefit the organisation. The subordinates do not wait for decisions from their managers but they know what they are supposed to do in the organisation (Trompenaars, & Hampden-Turner, 1998). This culture are influenced by the nature national culture these countries and, therefore, the organisation take this practices as the part of running the organisations. The subordinates see mangers and other high ranked people as their colleagues and they can consult in whatever the decisions the organisations takes towards a particular issue. The organisations are run in a straight forward manner because there is no corruption. In these countries the subordinates can arise against their bosses and oppose any decisions they feel do not represent their views in a better manner (Hofstede, 1984). Uncertainty Avoidance This dimension measures the extent at which individual and organisations feel threated by any unexpected occurrences. There are two ways of categorising this dimension which are high uncertainty avoidance and low uncertainty avoidance (Kennedy, 2002). The countries of high uncertainty avoidance include France, Spain, Argentina, Germany and Brazil while those of low uncertainty avoidance include Netherlands, Australia, Ireland and Great Britain. In area of high uncertainty avoidance uncertainties are seen as threats and they must be fought and eliminated in the society for one to be successful. In this countries and societies there are high level of stress and people are led by emotions and there always filled with anxiety while performing their duties. The people also have these problems in their day to day lives (Ackers, & Wilkinson, 2003). This has led to low scores on the level of the subjective health and the well-being of these individuals. People are supposed to think in the same direction and should have the same goals and objectives. There is no room for deviance and those deviate from the set directions are highly punished. Therefore, it is seen as a dangerous move to oppose any made decision. In this culture and dimension there is no room for mistakes and clarity is a key aspect in the structure of the society on carrying out any roles (Bruggemann, 1976). Those who hold high positions such as teachers should have all the answers and should not show their students that they are incompetent by failing to answer their questions. In this kind of culture teachers are portrayed as know it all. Citizens are seen to be inferior to those who are in authority because they are seen to be incompetent (Hofstede, 2007). Religion, science and philosophy in this cultures and countries are seen to be the only truth in the society. The emotions are put in place while making laws and rulings. People tend to stay for long spell in a job even if it is not favouring them and being disliked (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). This dimension has greatly influenced the global organisations in the way they run because they take the models of this culture. The organisations employees have a lot of stress in their places of work because this is their way of living. People tend to take uncertainties as threat in the places of work and work as hard as possible to eliminate them. The employees and organisations work to ensure that uncertainties do not occur (Deery, 2001). There are those countries that have weak uncertainty avoidance which have also influenced the organisations in the global context. In this countries and culture they tend to be ready for uncertainties and they are accepted as part of day to day running of the organisations. This dimension in these countries is guided by self-control and there is no stress in the place of work which makes the employees less anxious. The people in these countries are ready to accept change and they even change jobs (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). There are high scores of subjective health and well- being. In the countries deviance is tolerated and there is always opposition for the made decisions. People tend to dislikes the laws put in place and always try to break the law. People are always seen as competent in the eyes of authorities. This has influenced the culture of global organisations in that those who have positions in the place of work respect their subordinates because they see them as competent. Those who are in authority do not have know it all authority (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). People accept change and tend to change their jobs when they are not happy with the organisations they work in. there is a lot of relativism and empiricism are acceptable in the matters of religion, philosophy and science. The people working in an organisation tend to take this culture with them in their places of work. This means that they are opened minded and they approach their roles. Their structure does not put a lot of emphasis on clarity they tend to believe in ambiguity and chaos. In this dimension has a lot of influence in the culture of the global organisations because there are those who plan for the uncertainties that may occur while performing business. This has led to introduction of ways such as the insurance so as to cater for any losses resulting from the uncertainties (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). Individualism vs. Collectivism This dimension deals with the value that is given to an individual pitted against a group. It looks at the efforts of an individual compared to the efforts of a group of the people (Hofstede, 1984). This is done in different ways of structuring work and rewarding the people for what they have done (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). In the individualism part of the dimension people do not about other but they only take care of themselves and their families. People always use the term I and they want to maintain right to privacy. People always speak their mind without minding other peoples feeling. The education system is seen as a process that one should take. People put a lot of emphasis of doing their tasks rather working relations. This part of the dimension has influenced some businesses and organisation although not to a big extent (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). This is in that people own personal organisations and only mind about their profits. The collectivism part of the dimension things are done through a unity perspective because people prefer to stick together because of loyalty. The preference term is we and stress of belonging. They maintain harmony and they always want to vote as a group (Abdullah, 1996). Education is the process to acquire skills and relationships come before work (Hofstede, 2007). This dimension has influenced some organisations to do their operations in the collective manner. Resources are owned by the community and by groups. This is done to ensure that there is harmony in the organisation. The employees are seen to be part of the organisation (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). Masculinity versus Femininity This dimension compares masculine characteristics which include that of assertiveness and competition and the feminine traits of caring and quality of life (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). There are those countries with high masculinity levels and they include USA, Italy, Germany, Japan and Great Britain (Hofstede, 1984). Countries of low masculinity include Netherlands, Sweden and Norway. In a femininity society believes in both genders being caring and modest in their activities. Those who are employed find time for their families and there is a balance between work and family. Fight is highly discouraged but feelings are always considered while making decisions. In this societies rising to power does not depend on gender because many women are elected to power. This has highly influenced the culture of the organisations in the countries (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). The organisations in these countries appoint many women to leadership and management positions. The dimension has really helped in understanding the role of culture in the societies. The organisations undertake social corporate responsibility because they sympathise with the weak and the disadvantaged in the society (Hofstede, 1991). The masculine societies respect and admire the strong in the society and the weak do not have a place. Men always deal with facts and women around to deal with facts. This influences the organisations to appoint only men in leadership positions because facts are considered to be right and better in making decisions. The religion is also a factor and God is the central focus. Women are said to be weak and should cry while men should fight (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). Long Term and Short-Term Work Orientation This has high influenced organisations in having a proper planning basing from the past so as to have a better future. The organisations which works with short-term orientation have their better days in the past or in the current times (Hofstede & Bond, 1988). The society believes in the universal values of what is good and what is bad. The organisations aim at providing services to the people as their ultimate goal. This dimension explains why the employees and organisation promote national brands so as to market their countries. The society is guided by imperatives so as to determine the family. Economic growth by this dimension is only for the rich countries because they are endowed with many natural resources. There is always social spending and consumption and this portrays unity in the society. This means that the organisations have principles that are directed towards traditions (Guest, Michie, Sheehan, Conway, 2000). The organisations that work with long term orientation believe that those most important events will happen in future (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). Therefore, this makes the organisation to have proper plans to always keep on expanding so as to cater for future needs. The organisations are influenced by the culture that aims at saving for future investments and funds are always available for investment but not consumption. The success is always attributed to effort and failure is as a result of laziness and less effort. There is always a high economic growth in the countries that use this part of the dimension (Hofstede, & Hofstede, 2005). Conclusion In conclusion, these Hofstede Dimensions have greatly influenced the organisations as it is explained by Hofsede and other authors. This strong culture by the organisations have helped them maintain the national culture of the countries that they operate in and has also led to birth of the global culture which has influenced the culture of the organisations that operation at a global arena. Culture is a very important aspect in promoting growth of the organisations. These dimensions have been used when organisations are preparing actions plans before starting their operations in any country. This means that organisations should always put the culture of these countries into research so as to decide which countries to invest in. culture is very important in determining the way how employees of an organisation should interact and communicate. The culture of an organisation is very important because it determines the way operations in a given country should be carried out. References Abdullah, A. (1992). The Influence of Ethnic Values on Managerial Practices in Malaysia. Malaysian Management Review, 27(1), 3-18. Abdullah, A. (1996). Going Global: Cultural Dimensions in Malaysian Management. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Institute of Management. Ackers, P. & Wilkinson,A. 2003. Understanding work and employment: industrial relations in transition. Oxford University press: New York. Ahmad, K. (2001). Corporate leadership and workforce motivation in Malaysia. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 11(1), 82. Bruggemann, R. 1976. As an empirical study of various forms of job satisfaction. Journal of Industrial Engineering, 30, 71-74. Conrad, C. (1990). Strategic Organizational Communication: An integrated perspective (2nd ed.). Fort Worth: TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Deery, S. 2001. Industrial relations: a contemporary analysis. (2nd ed.). McGraw- Hill: Australia. Edwards, P. 2009. Industrial relations: Theory and practice. Wiley: New York. Fontaine, R., & Richardson, S. (2003). Cross-Cultural Reserach in Malaysia. Cross Cultural Management, 10(2), 75-89. Guest, D., Michie J., Sheehan, M., Conway, N. 2000. Effective People Management: Initial findings of the Future of Work study. CIPD: London. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values. California: SAGE Publications. Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultural dimensions in management and planning. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1, 81-99. Hofstede, G. (1991). Management in a Multicultural Society. Malaysian Management Review, 26(1), 3-12. Hofstede, G. (2007). Asian management in the 21st century. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24, 411-420. Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. H. (1988). The Confucius Connection: From Cultural Roots to Economic Growth. Organizational Dynamics, 17, 4-21. Hofstede, G., & Fink, G. (2007). Culture: organisations, personalities and nations. Gerhard Fink interviews Geert Hofstede. European J. International Management, 1(1/2), 14-22. Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind (2 ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Kennedy, J. (2002). Leaderhip in Malaysia: Traditional Values, International Outlook. Academy of Management Executive, 16(3), 15-26. Lim, L. (2001). Work-related Values of Malays and Chinese Malaysians. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 1(2), 209-226. Manshor, A. T., Fontaine, R., & Chong, S. C. (2003). Occupational Stress Among Managers: A Malaysian Survey. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(6), 622-628. Newman, K. L., & Nollen, S. D. (1996). Culture and Congruence: The Fit between Management Practices and National Culture. 27(4), 753-779. Redding, W. C. (1985). Stumbling Towards Identity: The Emergence of Organizational Communication as a Field of Study. In R. D. McPhee & P. K. Tompkins (Eds.), Organizational Communication: Traditional Themes and New Directions. Baverly Hills: SAGE Publisher Inc. Triandis, H. C. (1993). Collectivism and Individualism as Cultural Syndromes. Cross Cultural Research: The Journal of Comparative Social Science, 27(3/4), 155-180. Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. 1998. Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Diversity in Global Business (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Read More