Following are the most important research with regard to
establishing relationship between national culture and values.
Hofstede’s research
Hofstede (1980,1991), in order to find the common dimensions
of culture across the countries, gathered data from surveys with 116,000 respondents working from IBM from more than 70 countries around the world. The
underlying concept of the four dimensions is described below (Hofsede 1991):
1. Power distance: This dimension measures the 'social
equality' i.e.; to what extent a society accepts unequal distribution of power
in families, institutions and organizations. Inequality of power in
organizations is generally manifested in hierarchical superior-subordinate
relationships.
2. Uncertainty avoidance: This is a representation of
a society's tolerance for uncertain situations. It measures to what extent a
society manages those situations by providing specific and conventional
rules, regulations and norms; by rejecting aberrant ideas or behavior; by accepting the possibility of absolute truths and the accomplishments of
expertise. Countries, which score high in uncertainty avoidance, discourage
risk-taking behavior and innovation.
3. Individualism vs. collectivism: Individualism
gauges to what extent individuals in a country consider themselves as distinct
entities rather than as members of cohesive groups. Collectivism, on the other
hand, emphasizes on 'social ties or bonds' between individuals. Individualistic
society considers self-interest as more important than the group goal.
4. Masculinity vs. femininity: This dimension refers
to what extent dominant values in a society emphasizes masculine social values
like a work ethic expressed in terms of money, achievement and recognition as
opposed to feminine social role which show more concern for people and quality
of life.
Hofstede and Bond (1988) have identified a fifth dimension
(based on Confucian dynamism), called „long-term orientation‟,
which measures employees‟
devotion to the work ethic and their respect for tradition. It was found that
Asian countries like Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan are extremely
strong in work ethic and commitment to traditional Confucian values.
Hofstede (1991) further proposed that each person carries
around several layers of cultural programming. It starts when a child learns
basic values: what is right and wrong, good and bad, logical and illogical,
beautiful and ugly. Culture is about your fundamental assumptions of what it is
to be a person and how you should interact with other persons in your group and
with outsiders.
The first level of culture is the deepest, the most difficult
to change and will vary according to the culture in which we grow up. Other
layers of culture are learned or programmed in the course of education, through
professional or craft training and in organization life. Some of the aspects of
culture learned later have to do with conventions and ethics in your
profession. These layers are more of ways of doing things, or practices as
opposed to fundamental assumptions about how things are.
GLOBE research
(Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness,
1993)
GLOBE project integrates the above –mentioned cultural
attributes and variables with managerial behavior in organizations. This begun
in 1993,using data from 825 organizations and 62 countries. Following are some
of the questions asked in this project to prove that leadership and
organizational processes were directly influenced by cultural variables:
1. Are leader behaviors, attributes and organizational practices
universally accepted and effective across cultures?
2. Are they influenced by societal and organizational
cultures?
3. What is the effect of violating cultural norms that are
relevant to leadership and organizational practices?
4. Can the universal and culture-specific aspects of
leadership behaviour and organizational practice be explained with the help of
a theory accounting for systematic differences across cultures?
From the above, GLOBE project identified nine cultural
dimensions (House, Javidan, Hanges and Dorfman, 2002: 3-10)
1. Uncertainty - avoidance: GLOBE project defined this
dimension as the extent to which a society or an organization tries to avoid
uncertainty by depending heavily on prevalent norms, rituals and bureaucratic
practices.
2. Power distance: it is the degree to which power is
unequally shared in a society or an organization.
3. Collectivism-I i.e. societal collectivism: it is
the degree to which society and organization encourages, and recognizes
collective performance.
4. Collectivism-II – In-group collectivism: it is the
degree to which individuals take pride, loyalty and cohesiveness in their
organizations and families.
5. Gender egalitarianism: GLOBE has defined this as an
extent to which a society or an organization minimizes gender differences and
discrimination.
6. Assertiveness: it is the degree to which
individuals, both in organizational and social context are, assertive and
confrontational.
7. Future orientation: it is the degree to which
individuals are encouraged in long- term future – orientated behaviors such as
planning, investing, etc.
8. Performance orientation: this dimension encourages
and rewards group members for performance improvement.
9. Humane orientation: it is the degree to which
organizations or society encourage or reward for being fair, altruistic,
friendly, generous and caring.
Work behavior across cultures
In every culture, there are different sets of attitudes and
values which affect behavior. Similarly, every individual has a set of
attitudes and beliefs – filters through which he/she views management
situations within organizational context. Managerial beliefs, attitudes and
values can affect organizations positively or negatively. Managers portray
trust and respect in their employees in different ways in different cultures.
This is a function of their own cultural backgrounds. For example, managers
from specific cultures tend to focus only on the behavior that takes
place at work, in contrast to managers from diffused cultures who focus
on wider range of behavior including employees‟ private and professional lives.
Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1998:86) have conducted a survey to find out
whether the employees believe their companies should provide housing to the
employees. It was found out that most managers from diffused cultures believed
that company should provide such facility (former Yugoslavia 89%, Hungary 83%,
China 82%, Russia 78%), whereas less than 20% managers from specific
cultures such as UK, Australia, Denmark, France, etc., agreed on the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment