Critically Assess Geert Hofstede’s Use of Cultural Dimensions

gip Along with the trend toward world-wideization, parley across ethnical and national boundaries has a signifi cleart effect on business. The Dutch manage ment interrogationer Geert Hofstedes work of culture dimensions is regarded as an approach to measure inter- heathenish differences to business for scholars and practitioners. However, much(prenominal) a signifi stinkpott work does non escape criticism. Even though his guess consummates to six dimensions based on varies datum and is widely utilize by m some(prenominal) academics, McSweedney and umpteen specialists assert his work as an sacrosanct assumption.INTRODUCTION Nowadays, the countrified boundaries be do by the spread of global talk networks and the development of transportation. Beca example of globalization, countries ar tied closer than ever out front. Since the beginning of 1970s, scholars such as Geert Hofstede started to nonice the importance of heathenish differences for many feelings of busines s vitality, in particular, when business related to communicate between deal with incompatible cultures. Hofstede (http//geert-hofstede. com/dimensions. html) songed that civilization is more often a source of bout than of synergy.Cultural differences are a nuisance at best and often a disaster. Such conflicts are determined by the large numbers perception which is partly the crossing of culture. in that respectfore, in order to subdue the conflict caused by culture, it is important to pull in cultural differences under global business environment. Hofstedes cultural framework provides a guideline to recognize the differences between cultures and may improve the inter-cultural conversation in business area. However, his work is critiqued by scholars and researchers as an unreliable framework.This raise firstly divulgeline Hofstedes cultural framework briefly and because apply his hypothesis into practical situation to access whether it sack improves the inter-cult ural chat in the workplace. Afterwards, it will critique the limitations based on the literatures opposite to Hofstedes viewpoint. HOFSTEDES MODEL Geert Hofstedes work is ground-breaking and he himself is considered as the initiate and pathfinder in inter-cultural engage(Bond, 2002 and Sondergaard 1994). He described his significant research end based IBM employees placements and work-related shelters around the world.In the past 30 years, he persists to smoothen his theory from the previous four to six dimensions condition outgo, individuation versus Collectivism, masculinity versus Femininity, Uncertainty dodging and long-run orientation course, and Indulgence versus keep opent (Hofstede et al, 2010). In his book, individually country is evaluated by s amount of moneys on e really dimension, thus people can commence an insight into the cultural differences by comparing countries scores. Power standoffishness (PDI) is defined as that, to what degree people can di scern the unequal power distri justion in a society.PDI scores, deriving from tax of the less powerful people, indicate the level to which members accept power inequality. A low score demonstrates that members of the society prefer equality whereas a country has a high PDI score means that people accept striking power differences. Individualism versus Collectivism (IDV) is the dimension relating to how people ties to others within the community. Individualism pertains to societies whose members tie loosely and concern about themselves and their agile family. On the contrary, in collectivistic countries people belong to strong and cohesive group.Masculinity versus Femininity (MAS) refers to whether delirious gender roles are distinct or overlap. In masculine societies men are supposed to behave assertive, competitive and tough, on the contrary, women are supposed to be modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life (Hofstede, 2010 140). Uncertainty avoidance (UAI) related to termination to which members handle anxiety with ambiguous and unknown situations. fortified UAI Countries maintain rigid codes of belief and behaviour and are intolerant of temporary behaviour and ideas.Countries exhibiting weak UAI encourage practice than principles with a more relaxed attitude. Long-term versus Short-term orientation (LTO) deals with which kind of jimmy is fostered. This dimension is based on Bonds World Values Survey on Confucian dynamism. Long-term orientated countries foster virtues such as assiduity and thrift for future rewards, whereas short-term orientation accentes on rewards in the point and the past, which means particularly respect for tradition, preservation of face, and fulfilling social obligations (Hofstede, 2010 239).Indulgence versus Restrain is linked to happiness. An indulgent society permits relatively free gratification of canonic and natural human drives related to enjoying life and having fun (http//geert-hofstede. com/dimensio ns. html). On the contrary, parapet countries use strict social norms to control gratification of essentials and regulates. exercise As the world becomes globalized, to remain competitive and minimize conflicts which are the resultant of ignoring cultural differences, companies should non adopt an ethnocentric management mode to unalike cultural staff.To minimize these conflicts, many scholars and practitioners utilize Hofstedes work of cultural dimensions as a means to narrow the cultural gap in business. One reason why his framework is widely adopted is that his information are collected from varies companies and the fifth dimension is based on Confucian dynamism. Thus, to access its practical applicability to decrease the negative aspect of cultural differences and to elevate cross-cultural communication level, it is important to apply Hofstedes work into real examples.Since the late 2009, the famous lacquerese auto-maker Toyota struggled into an unprecedented crisis pa yable to pedal quality bothers which led Toyota to its historical largest recall in the world. The economist (Feb. 6, 2010) commented that safety recall is a common issue in vehicle manufacture but Toyota changed the order. In the process of managing crisis, Toyota acted according to Japanese culture without taking the American cultural values into reputation. It can be utter that one reason deteriorates the normal recall cars to a crisis is the ignorance of cultural differences.Some literatures examine the cultural aspect affecting the crisis and group them into two main points (Feng, 2010, Huang, 2010). Firstly, the Japanese management mode and organizational behaviour is different from American. As a result of the Japanese organizational culture, Toyota doed slowly after the accident. It is reported that on American time 28th August 2009, a Lexus ES 350 caused a fatal crash due to the gas pedal was stuck and the car was out of control (Los Angeles Times, Oct. 25, 2009). Yet Toyota did not respond to the accident without delay.US expatriate secretarial assistant Ray LaHood said that documents show that Toyota k cutting of the problem in late kinsfolk but did not give response until late January, moreover, they knowingly hid a dangerous defect for months from US officials and did not take action to entertain millions of drivers and their families (Thomas, 2010). The second reason is the different communication behaviours between Japan and the U. S. A. In the American hear and variety interviews, Akio Toyota, the president of Toyota Motor Corporation, spoke implicative, considerate and modest with a large number of modest words without any directly answers (Huang, 2010).In addition, Akio Toyotas behaviours are understood as hiding the impartiality by American people. According to Hofstedes framework, Western culture, represented by the U. S. A. , and such Japanese Eastern culture have significantly differences. The order of magnitude of the diffe rences has been directly described in ways. See from the figure 1. 1. Figure 1. 1 Japan and the U. S. A It is obvious that at that place exist large differences between Japan and the United States. One of the most telling to explain the crisis can be the collectivist versus individualist dimension.The fundamental issue related to IDV is the extent of connection between individuals and the group (Hofstede, 1980). From the data provided by Hofstede, Japan, at a score of 46 on a scale of 1 to 100, is a collectivist society, whose group allegiances are strong, cohesive and invoke higher authority. The individuals bewilder to the entity and preserve harmony. Thus the Toyota North American office was been called a pocket-sized safety deaf by LaHood (CBC news, Feb, 2010). The North American office need invoked by the highest authority to handle the accident and the applicable proposal mustiness pass through the unhurt company.Nevertheless, this system is not adaptable in handling pr oblems in America. According to Hofstede, Toyota needs to handle the problem immediately rather than make a long-term agreement. Meanwhile, the high power distance (Japan 54) can be used to compendium the slow response. Japan is a more centralized decision country, and it is therefore all the command should be endorsed by the president of Toyota Motor Corporation, Akio Toyoda. Because only the CEO can respond to the allegations, the response to the event was hauled in respect to the stakeh onetime(a)s living in a country that has only 40 in the index.As mentioned before, the official recall and excuse came four months later after the car accident has been reported. Yet the stakeholders demanded immediate response to the accident from Toyota regardless from the CEO or other representative. Moreover, during the accommodate Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing, in response to why Toyota responded so slow, Toyoda claimed that do not answered directly but reiterates his pl an to fit out up a global commission to address complains more speedily (CNN administration, Feb. 24, 2010).This phenomenon can adopt Hofstedes fifth dimension, long- term versus short-term orientation to demonstrate the inevitability of this divergence. Hofstede himself defines long-term orientation as the fostering of virtues oriented towards future rewards (Hofstede 2010 239), which means that high long-orientation scores countries (Japan 80) pay more help to the things that will benefit the future whereas low score countries tend to focus on nearby benefits or rewards. Jealous writes, In America, we ultimately tag people on what they are doing today for tomorrow, not for what they did yesterday. (CNN Politics, Feb. 24, 2010). In the hearing, American part were expected that Toyota undertake their obligations by providing continuous plans to the stakeholders. Akio did not account for this and responded indirectly to the solution to the current accident therefore caused Ameri cans the disgusted and surmise feeling. Consequently, if Toyota can notice the cultural differences and adopt Hofstedes theory to handle the problem in their American market in the bud, the common recall would not exacerbate American people and became a crisis which will threaten its reputation. judgeCulture is deeply rooted in many aspects of business life when people must interact with the people such as suppliers, buyers, employees or stakeholders. The font of Toyota crisis demonstrates that Hofstedes framework of cultural dimensions is practical to uncover these conflicts in cross-cultural communication. If people could realize the cultural differences concluded by Hofstede and take proper communication style and management mode, the fate of Toyota might be changed. However, the framework cannot act as a textbook to interpret the whole cultural gap even in the case of Toyota crisis.Many intercultural researchers criticized Hofstedes theory for not providing valuable channeli ze intelligence or regard it as absolute assumptions. Hofstede did not mention the impact of linguistic on the communication. incompatible languages and contents have objectively impact on the realizeing of the conversation. entertain the US-based 3M Company as an example. The company earns $7 billion per year in their overseas market, it become the forefront of language instruction by sponsoring an in-house dustup Society that provides linguistic and cultural financial backing to 3M (Frey-Ridgway, 1997).Freivalds (1995) said that the French tight Bull adopted the 3M model to train its employees in the competition of global marketplace and still in success. Language plays an irreplaceable position in the inter-cultural communication. Different types of body languages cause misunderstanding as well. In japan, plea needs humility, in order to be forgiven, Japanese usually avoid eye contact stands for rudeness, offend and provocation, but it would be decoded as disinterest, trea son and cunning in western countries (Huang, 2010, Dahl, 2004).Gudykunst and Nishida (19942) said that misunderstanding between Japan and American people often stem from not knowing the norms and rules guiding each others communication. In hofstedes model, the data come from the English-speaking company IBM and it is aim to evaluate work attitude and value, this led his theory ignore linguistic and body language difference. Moreover, in the process of communication among Akio Toyoda and the American interlocutor, the stakeholders, the Congress representatives or the media people, misunderstanding occurred continually.As mentioned above, Toyota responded inoffensive to the problem (Huang, 2010). Akio repeated the apology several times and declined to give brief answers to undertake the obligation and to interpret the information and plan for the stakeholders in the hearing (Clark McCurry, 2010). The answer type can be derived from the patterns of Japanese communication. Lincoln (1 995) study Japanese and found that due to the politeness cultural they reluctance to record no directly. Hall (1976) separated communication into High-context and low-context.The United States is a typic low-context communication country while Japan belongs to high-context communication. Low-context communication refers to the patterns of communication use explicit verbal to convey meanings, whereas high-context pattern draw heavily on context. This cultural difference is raised by Hall instead of Hofstede. Michael (1997) claim that literatures are lack of specific details and are concluded in broad behavioral terms. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1997) classified cultures has seven value orientations which is more than Hofstedes six dimensions and has somewhat different military positions.Additionally, Dahl (2004) criticizes the theory is the result of very little data, especially from specific companies with limited numbers of questions. This indicates that culture can be sep arated into more dimensions and those national scores and ranks are not the exclusive guide to improve inter-cultural communications. From Hofstedes (1980) research, Japan ranks in the bosom level of Individualism versus collectivism dimension. Yet Japan is widely stereotypical as a harmonious society.Woodring (2010 cited in Jandt, 1995 163) used the original Hofstedes questionnaire to study Japanese students and found that students scored lower on power distance whereas higher on individualism comparing with Hofstedes original sample. Woodring explained that the different scores might be the result of age that is means, students may congratulations more on individualism and equality than the whole Japanese society. round 1990, youths 25 years old and under were named as shin jin rui (literally new human beings), who were described as selfish, self-centered, and disrespectful of elders and tradition by older Japanese.In the description from Hofstede suggested that the Japan is a group oriented and hierarchical country. However, there are evidences to show that the young generation seeks for egalitarian and individualism. This demonstrates that Hofstedes research can lead to stereotype and this ought to be avoided. Furthermore, this study shows that cultural value is dynamic. Holden (2002) criticizes the relative reliance on Hofstedes icon in the workplace. He points out that the data is outdated as it was collected before 30 years.Hofstede attempts to set a certain form of culture for people to understand specific cultures and he (Hofstede, 2010 34) states that cutlures, especially national cultures, are extremely motionless over time. This has been criticized as functionalist ambition of measuring largely unquantifiable phenomena (Gray and Maloory, 1998 57). Hostede himself stated, There is no such thing as objectivity in the study of social reality we will too often to be natural, but we may at least try to be inter subjective. As His data are come fr om the questionnaire made by a group of western people, as a result of this, the question are tend to reflect western culture which means Hofstedes theory has its cultural bias. Meanwhile, there is a debate about what level of analysis is practical for the term culture to be a viable tool. McSweeney (2000) questions the classification of culture in Hofstedes theory. Hofstede (2010 10) stated that people are shaped by certain cultural trains from the same country. Although general cultural dimensions can be established at a cultural level, ndividuals may not necessarily reflect the national culture they belong to. Hofstede (1980, 1991) admits that using data from the level of country to analyze the individuals is not appropriate, and labeled it ecological illusion. He (1991253) affirms that national cultural level reflects central tendencies () for the country, it is, not practical to analyze and predict specific individual behaviors or events. cultivation Generally overview the a ssessment, Geert Hofstedes use of cultural dimensions provides a measurable paradigm to attract peoples attention to cultural differences and contribute to the inter-cultural study.For those people who are involved in international commerce, culture is important for many aspects of business life, thus, if people go into another country to communicate with local anaesthetic company, changing the management process and practices to meet their values is essential. Concluding from the case analysis of Toyota crisis, Hofstedes cultural model indeed provides an effective reference to support relegate cross-cultural communication as it uncover the reasons of cultural conflict for people to apply appropriate method to minimize its negative influence.However, cultural dimension theory functions limited in small space as it is not perfect. It regards culture as a fixed concept and separates it by national boundaries is improper. The data is collected in several decades years before even it has been updated in recent years based on questionnaire in a specific group in international companies from a perspective of western people. Moreover, it narrows culture into six dimensions may potentially disturb the derived value prediction as certain context influences on the individual respondents.The inter-cultural communication conflicts exist no matter how much understanding goes both ways. In conclusion, Hofstedes work of cultural dimensions is a supplement for supporting better inter-cultural communication, the bilateral respect of culture and positive attitude are the core to successful inter-cultural communication. Bibliography Bond, M. H. (2002). Reclaiming the Individual from Hofstedes Ecological Analysis- A 20-Year Odyssey Comment on Oyserman et al. psychological Bulletin, 128 (1) 73-77 CBC news (Feb 2, 2010), Toyota slow o react LaHood- US Transportation Secretary criticizes automaker. Available at (13 May, 2012) Clark, A. & McCurry, J. (2010). Toyota boss offers si ncere regrets for improper accelerators, The Guardian, Thursday 25 February 2010. Available at http//www. guardian. co. uk/business/2010/feb/25/toyota-akio-toyoda-congress? INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487 (13 May, 2012) CNN Politics (Feb 24, 2010). Toyota president testifies before Congress. Available at http//articles. cnn. com/2010-02-24/politics/toyota. earing. updates_1_toyoda-inaba-national-press-club? _s=PMPOLITICS (13 May, 2012) Dahl, S. (2004). Intercultural Research The Current State of Knowledge. Middlesex University Discussion musical theme No. 26. Available at http//papers. ssrn. com/sol3/papers. cfm? abstract_id=658202 (13 May, 2012) Feng, Y. (2010). Toyota crisis management ignorance? a swedish case of consumers perceptions. Available at http//hh. diva-portal. org/smash/record. jsf? pid=diva2349746 (13 May, 2012) Freivalds, J. (1995). Learning languages. Communication World, celestial latitude 24-7.Frey-Ridgway, S. (1997). The cultural dimension of international business . Collection Building, 16(1) 12 23 Gudykunst, W. & Nishida, T. (1994), Bridging Japanese-North American Differences, Communicating Effectively in Multicultural Contexts Series, Thousand Oaks Sage, p. 2 Hofstedes website, available at http//geert-hofstede. com/dimensions. html (13 May, 2012) Hofstede, G. (1980) Cultures Consequences internationalistic Differences in Work-related Values Beverly Hills, CA Sage. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations software of the mind, 2nd Ed.New York McGraw-Hill Hofstede, G. , Hofstede, G. J. & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations software of the mind, third Ed. New York McGraw-Hill Holden, N. (2002). Cross-cultural management a knowledge management perspective. Harlow pecuniary Times Prentice Hall Huang, Z. (2010). (From the perspective of inter-cutlural communication to see Japan-America cultural differecesanalysis Toyota recall). Journal of Huaihua University,29 (6) Jandt, F. E. (2009). An Introduction to Intercultural Communication Identities in a Global