This document discusses cultural understanding and frameworks for analyzing culture, focusing on Geert Hofstede's model of cultural dimensions. It summarizes Hofstede's five dimensions of culture - power distance, individualism vs collectivism, masculinity vs femininity, uncertainty avoidance, and long-term vs short-term orientation. It also outlines advantages and limitations of Hofstede's framework, noting it provides a standardized way to compare cultures but may overgeneralize or not account for internal diversity within countries. The conclusion is that culture is a complex, dynamic concept that influences behaviors and there is no single model that fully explains cultural differences.

1. Cultural understanding is a complex idea and many people have attempted to
develop models/frameworks to help understand culture
Presented to the faculty of the
Department of Academics
Iqra University
Gulshan Campus
In the fulfillment of the course Cross cultural management
BBA
Submitted to: Nadia Rahim
By: Fatima Mairaj
(5917)
Fall 2015

2. Often this go well, as cultural differences are interesting and deepen. Although sometime
in future, things become problematic because of few logics that we don`t understand. Therefore,
it is important to develop the understanding about the importance of cultures, so that individual
can work more effectively and disallow such conflicts. “Culture is the entire stock of
information, understanding, beliefs, and ethics, chains of value, religion, judgment of point,
attitude, symbol, ideas, and objective which hold by the group of individual in the development
stage through which individual and gathering will be established”. According to (Hofstede G.
D., 2010, p. 3). Ways of defining culture. “Culture is the collective programming of the mind
that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from others”. Culture is the
system through which individual learn how to be in the human race, how to act, what to value
and how to contribute in the way of life. In other word Triandis H,. C. (2007). Explain that the
culture is being defined and discuss in different literature of academic and professional
discipline. Therefore, culture consist of three essential characteristics. Firstly, culture transpire
the interaction among individual and environment. Secondly, culture is formed of public element
and thirdly, culture transmit across the time period and generation. Hofestede’s in the study
discussed that culture is the collective encoding of mind that every person is individual from
another not because they are belong to distinct culture but they may have different beliefs from
one another because of different level of culture like religious values, ethnic groups and social
class these are most common levels that are used to identify a common group of people or
society but not the country because of diversity in culture and its sub culture. The model that is
created for Culture is general with other that he gives in the theory is similar reflection amongst
all the entire frame work. It is often defines as the deep inside, all the individual are same but
they actually they are not. Each individual is distinct to others. sometimes it is rigid to adopt that
people live in diverse culture. Geert Hofstede`s study explain us to understand culture in simple
way so that it will become more efficient while interacting other individual around the globe. For
instance, in serveral countries Yes, Means, I hear you, More than, I agree. On contrary sterotype
can build negavtive effect in culture.

3. Noorderhaven, N. G., &Wu, P. C. (2002) defined culture as the example of varieties inside a
general public, or, all the more particularly, as the example of profound level qualities and
presumptions connected with societal adequacy, imparted by an associating gathering of
individuals.From the definition we can imagine that culture is a very broader thing to understand
because of people has different beliefs about a particular aspect which sometimes helps to bring
forward new ideas or sometimes create complexities amongst group of people with different
interpretations which creates conflicts.
In the view of many researchers including Trompenaars and Hampden Turner and
Hofstede`s develop different models/framework to construct perception and preferences of
individual around the globe. Moreover, they found that individual which belong to different
aspect of culture are not only distinctive from one to each other but also dissimilar in specific
nature and the reason is just because culture has it`s own thoughts, beliefs and value which
influence by different element. Therefore, the most interesting approach discussed by a
sociologist (Pedersen, 1997, p. 159) that the complexities in explaining culture is by following
comprehensive literature he states that “People use culture in the same way as scientists use
paradigms to organize and normalize their activity, the elements of culture are used, modified or
discarded depending on their utility in organizing reality”. In addition, the concept of a “culture
complex” is a synthetic idea. It comes from the variety of background and cross-cultural settings
hence, the Jung`s complex theory was the first input in psycho- analysis which play a important
role in Jungian theory in which he discussed some of drivers about inner and outer knowledge of
individuals.
To understand more about culture model Hofstede G. , (2011) proposed a model based on
five dimensions which distinguish the diversity among culture. According to Hofstede G.
classify that power distance has been describe as a level to which the few authority members of
organizations and association similar like family excepted that power is distributed unfairly
which state inequality. Power and discrimination both are two exceptional facts of any society.
Hofstede G., and Mooij, D., (2010) define individualism and collectivism as people who always
look after their families and themselves where as other people which belong to other group will
look for loyalty. Furthermore, researchers stated that individualistic cultures are known as
“universalistic” in nature presume that their values are applicable and consist of low connection

4. with definite verbal communication. Where as in collectivistic cultures an individual
characteristic is depend upon on society. Collectivistic culture are high context communication
because these culture excerises as indirect form of communication. Another important dimension
is masculinity and femininity it is the degree to which masculininty differ from femininty refer to
the distribution roles among genders. Thus, masculine attribute include authority, performance,
achievement are dominant. While feminine culture lies on following values personal
relationship, quality of life, services and safety. The primary goal is to define masculine and
other is to illustrate feminine because the certain goals and standards express how potential
people is motivated is culture. According to Hofstede G. , et al (2010) defines uncertainity
avoidence as the degree to which the members of a culture feel exposed by unidentified
condition which exhibit through prediction and pressure. In addition, Konopaske, (2004) explain
that the individual in high uncertainity avoidence feel insecurity by the risk and unstability
condition to reduce the risk and uncertainity by establishing strict laws, rules and regulation.
Although, strong uncertainity avoidence exposed by displaying strict rules and structure which
contain the modernization. The fifth dimension of Hofstede`s framework is long term
oerientation. According to author long versus short term oreintation is the degree to which
culture show partical future oriented perception rather than conservative significant short term
point of view. To put in other word Mullins, (2007) this dimension initially name as Confucian
work dynamism was demostrate by Micheal Bond who wants to classify chinese culture values
and determine the impact on the workplace.
ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATION S OF HOFSTEDE`S STUDY
According to Baumüller M. , (2007) Hofstede`s framework has acquire the significant
observation from business scholars in current years, but at the same moment this have been the
topic of worthwhile argument. To put in other way Hofstede`s framework is commonly as the
most broad framework of national cultural value. It depends on high external validity and
important relationship with economic, social and geographic index. Furthermore, Hofstede`s
framework of culture found valid, dependable, consistent with previous studies and stable over
the period of time. Therefore, Hofstede`s culture framework is recognized as a key indicator
which have been utilize in study for the measurement of cultural distance. Singh & Kogut,

5. (1998) would claim that the criticism has concentrated on the methodological approach of
Hofstede`s studies. In addition, it has been suggested that the dimensions of culture to
distinguish by Hofstede`s is the product of the study.
Firstly, the standard of the country do not match with individuals of that particular
country. However, this model has been established to approve when it applt to general
population, one would be informed that not every individual and region with it`s sub-culture
would fit into particuar pattern. This will be utilizing as a guide to understand the differentiation
in culture among countries. There is no law that set as a stone there is always exception for the
rules. Secondly, in group orientation cultures individual might respond to particular question id
they belong to similar group.
Hofstede`s develop five cultures dimension and its limitation. These are power distance,
collectivism versus individualism, femininity versus masculinity, uncertainty avoidance and
long-term orientation versus short- term oreintation. In poweer distance is the degree in which
the high power distance requires centralization authority and people have to do as they have
been given instructions. Other factor is collectivist cultures value which is discredit that have
been positioned on attitude of individual. Thus, in individualist culture depend on individual
rather than group authority. Masculine culture excerises the traditional view point that female
should obey male where as femininity cultures demostrate that both men and women are equal
and have capacity to attain the same outcome. Another important factor is cultures with high
uncertainty avoidance contain strict rules where as low uncertainty avoidence concentrates on
long term strategies being informal. On the other side, the long term orientaion which present in
culture require old age beliefs and values. At the same time as short term orientation rely more
on indiviudal talent, ability, education and understanding in spite of their different division
which make every individual equal. In hofstede`s study there is unproven assumption of the
homogeneity of cultures as well as an equal inexperience`s statement of homogeneity cultures.
Different culture consist of different attributes such as attitude and morale.
The hofstede model of culture dimension can be extensive when it comes to examine
country culture.

6. The study of Hofstede`s has limitation, one is the small use of samples. Other limitation
is time because the culture of country would have change over a time. One of the main issues
was receiving negative feedback from the respondent. The following advantages of Hofstede`s
framework are:
Power Distance
1. Less inequalities
2. Less dependence
3. More freedom
4. Extended variety of lifestyles
5. More co-operation
Masculinity versus Femininity
1. Sensitivity
2. Safety
3. Relationships
4. Quality of life
5. Unity
6. Equal share at home and work
7. Justice
8. Flexibility
9. Authority
10. Competition
11. Gender gaps
Individualistic versus collectivistic
1. Co-operation
2. Equal opportunity
3. Merger
4. Inclusion
5. Selfish and self- dependent

7. 6. Lack of concern of others
Uncertainty Avoidance
1. More acceptance of distinction
2. Changes in management easier
The following disadvantage of Hofstede`s dimension are:
1. inequality accepted
2. Equal treatment expose
3. No identification of discrimination
4. High hierarchical system
5. Great centralization of power
6. Respect for young leaders
CONCLUSION:
The obvious conclusion to be drawn on culture is that it is fuzzy idea or concept which
influences consumer behavior. The entire thing is considered on the base of various approach
and few dimensions provide complete explanation of culture difference. The one which is more
focus closely is Geert Hofstede`s culture dimension. It is shown various common and distinct
culture dimensions. On the balance I tend to believe that we live in dynamic environment.
Moreover, culture consist of distinct clusters of individual either they are divided geographically,
historically or social. Other may prefer other product because of their culture and morale. Each
individual have different preference of different culture they belong to.

8. Bibliography
Ana Maria, M. F. (2006). Hofstede'sdimensionsof culture ininternational marketingstudies. Journalof
BusinessResearch , 277-284.
Baumüller,M.(2007). Managing CulturalDiversity:An Empirical Examination of CulturalNetworks.
Geert,H. (2011). DimensionalizingCultures:The HofstedeModel. OnlineReadingsin Psychology and
Culture, 5-26.