(POWER DISTANCE &         UNCERTAINTY) Group 2: Chan Nisreen Maryam Said Naisula8/6/2012
Power Distance Index(PDI)China (CHN) vs New Zealand (NZ)                        Power Distance Index                      ...
Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-hofstede.com)           Power Distance Index in           China                 ...
Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-hofstede.com)            Power Distance Index in New            Zealand         ...
5OTHER EXAMPLES OFPDI
Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-hofstede.com)6       PDI in Denmark                What about Denmark?     With ...
Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-hofstede.com)7         PDI in Malaysia              What about Malaysia?Malaysia...
Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI)      China (CHN) vs New Zealand (NZ)8                  Uncertainty Avoidance Index605040...
Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-                                                                                ...
Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-                                                                               h...
11OTHER EXAMPLES OFUAI
UAI in Japan12                                  What about Japan?     The dimension Uncertainty Avoidance has to do with t...
THANK YOU FOR   LISTENING8/6/2012
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The hofstede’s model (power distance and uncertainty

5,345 views

Published on

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
5,345
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The hofstede’s model (power distance and uncertainty

  1. 1. (POWER DISTANCE & UNCERTAINTY) Group 2: Chan Nisreen Maryam Said Naisula8/6/2012
  2. 2. Power Distance Index(PDI)China (CHN) vs New Zealand (NZ) Power Distance Index CHN 38% NZ 62%Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-hofstede.com)
  3. 3. Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-hofstede.com) Power Distance Index in China What about China?If we explore the Chinese culture through the lens of the 5-D Model, we can get a good overview of the deep drivers of Chinese culture relative to other world cultures. Power distance This dimension deals with the fact that all individuals in societies are not equal – it expresses the attitude of the culture towards these inequalities amongst us.Power distance is defined as the extent to which the less powerful members ofinstitutions and organisations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. At 80 China sits in the higher rankings of PDI – i.e. a society that believes thatinequalities amongst people are acceptable. The subordinate-superior relationship tends to be polarized and there is no defense against power abuse by superiors. Individuals are influenced by formal authority and sanctions and are in general optimistic about people’s capacity for leadership and initiative. People should not
  4. 4. Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-hofstede.com) Power Distance Index in New Zealand What about New Zealand?If we explore the New Zealand culture through the lens of the 5-D Model, we can get a good overview of the deep drivers of its culture culture relative to other world cultures. Power distanceThis dimension deals with the fact that all individuals in societies are not equal – it expressesthe attitude of the culture towards these inequalities amongst us. Power distance is defined as the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organisationswithin a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. It has to do with the fact that a society’s inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders. New Zealand scores low on this dimension (22). Within organizations, hierarchy is established for convenience, superiors are always accessible and managers rely on individual employees and teams for their expertise. Both managers and employees expect to be consulted and information is shared frequently. At the same time, communication is informal, direct and participative.
  5. 5. 5OTHER EXAMPLES OFPDI
  6. 6. Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-hofstede.com)6 PDI in Denmark What about Denmark? With a score of 18 points Denmark is at the very low end of thisdimension compared to other countries. This matches perfectly with whatmany foreigners in Denmark express: Danes do not lead, they coach andemployee autonomy is required. In fact, Denmark ranks highest amongst the EU27 countries in terms of employee autonomy. With a very egalitarian mindset the Danes believe in independency, equal rights, accessible superiors and that management facilitates and empowers. Power is decentralized and managers count on the experience of their team members. Respect among the Danes is something which you earn by proving your hands-on expertise. Workplaces have a very informal atmosphere with direct and involving communication and on a first name basis. Employees expect to be consulted.
  7. 7. Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-hofstede.com)7 PDI in Malaysia What about Malaysia?Malaysia scores very high on this dimension (score of 104) which means that people accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and whichneeds no further justification. Hierarchy in an organisation is seen as reflecting inherent inequalities, centralization is popular, subordinates expect to be told what to do and the ideal boss is a benevolent autocrat. Challenges to the leadership are not well-received.
  8. 8. Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) China (CHN) vs New Zealand (NZ)8 Uncertainty Avoidance Index605040302010 0 CHN NZ Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert-
  9. 9. Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert- hofstede.com) 9 Uncertainty Avoidance Index in China Uncertainty avoidance The dimension Uncertainty Avoidance has to do with the way that a society deals with the fact that the future can never be known: should we try to control the future or just let it happen? This ambiguity brings with it anxiety and different cultures have learnt to deal with this anxiety in different ways. The extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by ambiguous or unknown situations and have created beliefs and institutions that try to avoid these is reflected in the UAI score. At 30 China has a low score on uncertainty avoidance. Truth may be relativethough in the immediate social circles there is concern for Truth with a capital T and rules (but not necessarily laws) abound. None the less, adherence to laws andrules may be flexible to suit the actual situation and pragmatism is a fact of life. TheChinese are comfortable with ambiguity; the Chinese language is full of ambiguous meanings that can be difficult for Western people to follow. Chinese are adaptable and entrepreneurial. At the time of writing the majority (70% -80%) of Chinese businesses tend to be small to medium sized and family owned.
  10. 10. Sources from Geert Hofstede (http://geert- hofstede.com)10 Uncertainty Avoidance Index in New Zealand Uncertainty avoidanceThe dimension Uncertainty Avoidance has to do with the way that a society dealswith the fact that the future can never be known: should we try to control the future or just let it happen? This ambiguity brings with it anxiety and different cultures have learnt to deal with this anxiety in different ways. The extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by ambiguous or unknown situationsand have created beliefs and institutions that try to avoid these is reflected in the UAI score.New Zealand scores 49 on this dimension and is a fairly pragmatic culture in terms of uncertainty avoidance. This means that both generalists and experts are needed. There is focus on planning, and they can be altered at short notice andimprovisations made. Emotions are not shown much in New Zealand; people are fairly relaxed and not adverse to taking risks. Consequently, there is a larger degree of acceptance for new ideas, innovative products and a willingness to try something new or different, whether it pertains to technology, business practices, or foodstuffs.
  11. 11. 11OTHER EXAMPLES OFUAI
  12. 12. UAI in Japan12 What about Japan? The dimension Uncertainty Avoidance has to do with the way that a society deals with the fact that the future can never be known: should we try to control the future or just let it happen. This ambiguity brings with it anxiety and different cultures have learnt to deal with this anxiety in different ways. The extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by ambiguous or unknown situations and have created beliefs and institutions that try to avoid these is reflected in the UAI score. At 92 Japan is one of the most uncertainty avoiding countries on earth. This is often attributed to the fact that Japan is constantly threatened by natural disasters from earthquakes, tsunamis (this is a Japanese word used internationally), typhoons to volcano eruptions. Under these circumstances Japanese learned to prepare themselves for any uncertain situation. This goes not only for the emergency plan and precautions for sudden natural disasters but also for every other aspects of society. You could say that in Japan anything you do is prescribed for maximum predictability. From cradle to grave, life is highly ritualized and you have a lot of ceremonies. For example, there is opening and closing ceremonies of every school year which are conducted almost exactly the same way everywhere in Japan. At weddings, funerals and other important social events, what people wear and how people should behave are prescribed in great detail in etiquette books. School teachers and public servants are reluctant to do things without precedence. In corporate Japan, a lot of time and effort is put into feasibility studies and all the risk factors must be worked out before any project can start. Managers ask for all the detailed facts and figures before taking any decision. This high need for uncertainty avoidance is one of the reasons why changes are so difficult to realize in Japan.
  13. 13. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING8/6/2012

×