Skip to main content

Introduction to Development Theories - Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory

 Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory

This theory was developed by Geert Hofstede and is a framework used to understand the differences in culture across countries and to discern the ways that business is done across different cultures. In other words, the framework is used to distinguish between different national cultures, the dimensions of culture, and assess their impact on a business setting.

Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory was created in 1980 by Dutch management researcher, Geert Hofstede. The aim of the study was to determine the dimensions in which cultures vary.

Hofstede identified six categories that define culture:

·       Power Distance Index

·       Collectivism vs. Individualism

·       Uncertainty Avoidance Index

·       Femininity vs. Masculinity

·       Short-Term vs. Long-Term Orientation

·       Restraint vs. Indulgence

1.     Power Distance Index

The power distance index considers the extent to which inequality and power are tolerated. In this dimension, inequality and power are viewed from the viewpoint of the followers – the lower level.

·       High power distance index indicates that a culture accepts inequity and power differences, encourages bureaucracy, and shows high respect for rank and authority.

·       Low power distance index indicates that a culture encourages organizational structures that are flat and feature decentralized decision-making responsibility, participative style of management, and place emphasis on power distribution. 

2.     Individualism vs. Collectivism

The individualism vs. collectivism dimension considers the degree to which societies are integrated into groups and their perceived obligations and dependence on groups.

·       Individualism indicates that there is a greater importance placed on attaining personal goals. A person’s self-image in this category is defined as “I.”

·       Collectivism indicates that there is a greater importance placed on the goals and well-being of the group. A person’s self-image in this category is defined as “We”.

3.     Uncertainty Avoidance Index

The uncertainty avoidance index considers the extent to which uncertainty and ambiguity are tolerated. This dimension considers how unknown situations and unexpected events are dealt with.

·       A high uncertainty avoidance index indicates a low tolerance for uncertainty, ambiguity, and risk-taking. The unknown is minimized through strict rules, regulations, etc.

·       A low uncertainty avoidance index indicates a high tolerance for uncertainty, ambiguity, and risk-taking. The unknown is more openly accepted, and there are lax rules, regulations, etc.

4.     Masculinity vs. Femininity

The masculinity vs. femininity dimension is also referred to as “tough vs. tender,” and considers the preference of society for achievement, attitude towards sexuality equality, behavior, etc.

·       Masculinity comes with the following characteristics: distinct gender roles, assertive, and concentrated on material achievements and wealth-building.

·       Femininity comes with the following characteristics: fluid gender roles, modest, nurturing, and concerned with the quality of life.

5.     Long-Term Orientation vs. Short-Term Orientation

The long-term orientation vs. short-term orientation dimension considers the extent to which society views its time horizon.

·       Long-term orientation shows focus on the future and involves delaying short-term success or gratification in order to achieve long-term success. Long-term orientation emphasizes persistence, perseverance, and long-term growth.

·       Short-term orientation shows focus on the near future, involves delivering short-term success or gratification, and places a stronger emphasis on the present than the future. Short-term orientation emphasizes quick results and respect for tradition.

6.     Indulgence vs. Restraint

The indulgence vs. restraint dimension considers the extent and tendency for a society to fulfill its desires. In other words, this dimension revolves around how societies can control their impulses and desires.

·       Indulgence indicates that a society allows relatively free gratification related to enjoying life and having fun.

·       Restraint indicates that a society suppresses gratification of needs and regulates it through social norms.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions

Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Understanding Different Countries https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_66.htm Imagine this scenario: Sayid's boss has asked him to manage a large, global team. In this new role, he'll be working closely with people in several different countries. He's excited about the opportunities that his connectedness will present, but he's also nervous about making cross-cultural faux pas. He knows that cultural differences can act as a barrier to communication, and that they could affect his ability to build connections and motivate people. So, how can he begin to understand these differences and work effectively with people from different cultures? © iStockphoto takasuu Learn how to work with teams and co-workers from around the world. In this article, we'll explore how you can use Hofstede's Six Dimensions of Culture to work effectively with people from a range of cultural and geographic backgrounds. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory

Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory is a framework for cross-cultural communication , developed by Geert Hofstede . It describes the effects of a society's culture on the values of its members, and how these values relate to behavior, using a structure derived from factor analysis . [1] Hofstede developed his original model as a result of using factor analysis to examine the results of a world-wide survey of employee values by IBM between 1967 and 1973. It has been refined since. The original theory proposed four dimensions along which cultural values could be analyzed: individualism-collectivism; uncertainty avoidance; power distance (strength of social hierarchy) and masculinity-femininity (task orientation versus person-orientation). Independent research in Hong Kong led Hofstede to add a fifth dimension, long-term orientation, to cover aspects of values not discussed in the original...
Post a Comment
Read more

Reviving Critical Modernism in Development Studies

Reviving Critical Modernism in Development Studies 7 September 2016 Richard Heeks https://ict4dblog.wordpress.com/2016/09/07/reviving-critical-modernism-in-development-studies/ Critical modernism forms a very small, rather dated trickle of ideas within development studies. How could it be updated to serve as a lens for current research? Critical modernism can be understood as a wide sweep of ideas, particularly encompassing thinkers such as Habermas and Gramsci [1] .  But it has only a small explicit footprint within development studies largely triggered by a chapter in Peet & Hartwick’s book Theories of Development , published in 1999 [2] .  Itself developed from earlier work, this was particularly a response to “post-development” ideas that arose in the 1980s. Despite subsequent editions of Theories of Development , the core text on critical modernism by Peet & Hartwick remains unchanged, and the specific notion has gained little overt traction in...
Post a Comment
Read more